Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
By your "logic" childless couples should be told the are no longer married.
"logic" denied.
That's the logic of an imbecile.
Marriage is a necessary condition for successful procreation. No one ever said it was a sufficient condition.
They don't revoke your drivers license if you decline to drive.
Oh, I couldn't have gotten women pregnant before marriage? Damn and to think I wasted all that money on condoms.
Another liberal turd who failed to get the point.
Yeah, you can get women pregnant without getting married, and their offspring will probably end up populating one of the state penitentiaries of the country. That may fit with the liberal conception of "successful child rearing," but rational people have a different opinion on the subject.
I just called a conservatard in another thread about 1 minute ago.
You stupid partisans REALLY don't like people who think for themselves do you?
If you're thinking for yourself, why are you posting arguments I've heard 10,000 times before?
what arguments are those?
My argument here is basically
mind your own fucking business
By your "logic" childless couples should be told the are no longer married.
"logic" denied.
That's the logic of an imbecile.
Marriage is a necessary condition for successful procreation. No one ever said it was a sufficient condition.
They don't revoke your drivers license if you decline to drive.
Oh, I couldn't have gotten women pregnant before marriage? Damn and to think I wasted all that money on condoms.
Another liberal turd who failed to get the point.
Yeah, you can get women pregnant without getting married, and their offspring will probably end up populating one of the state penitentiaries of the country. That may fit with the liberal conception of "successful child rearing," but rational people have a different opinion on the subject.
You stupid partisans REALLY don't like people who think for themselves do you?
If you're thinking for yourself, why are you posting arguments I've heard 10,000 times before?
what arguments are those?
My argument here is basically
mind your own fucking business
Marriage is everyone's business, asshole.
By your "logic" childless couples should be told the are no longer married.
"logic" denied.
That's the logic of an imbecile.
Marriage is a necessary condition for successful procreation. No one ever said it was a sufficient condition.
They don't revoke your drivers license if you decline to drive.
Oh, I couldn't have gotten women pregnant before marriage? Damn and to think I wasted all that money on condoms.
Another liberal turd who failed to get the point.
Yeah, you can get women pregnant without getting married, and their offspring will probably end up populating one of the state penitentiaries of the country. That may fit with the liberal conception of "successful child rearing," but rational people have a different opinion on the subject.
You stupid partisans REALLY don't like people who think for themselves do you?
If you're thinking for yourself, why are you posting arguments I've heard 10,000 times before?
what arguments are those?
My argument here is basically
mind your own fucking business
Marriage is everyone's business, asshole.
Then you won't mind if I pop on over and make sure you're not having inappropriate sex with your wife eh?
By your "logic" childless couples should be told the are no longer married.
"logic" denied.
That's the logic of an imbecile.
Marriage is a necessary condition for successful procreation. No one ever said it was a sufficient condition.
They don't revoke your drivers license if you decline to drive.
Oh, I couldn't have gotten women pregnant before marriage? Damn and to think I wasted all that money on condoms.
Another liberal turd who failed to get the point.
Yeah, you can get women pregnant without getting married, and their offspring will probably end up populating one of the state penitentiaries of the country. That may fit with the liberal conception of "successful child rearing," but rational people have a different opinion on the subject.
You stupid partisans REALLY don't like people who think for themselves do you?
If you're thinking for yourself, why are you posting arguments I've heard 10,000 times before?
what arguments are those?
My argument here is basically
mind your own fucking business
Marriage is everyone's business, asshole.
Then you won't mind if I pop on over and make sure you're not having inappropriate sex with your wife eh?
Yeah, right. Be my guest. I'll enjoy watching her cut your balls off.
Marriage and sex are two different things. That you confuse the twoBy your "logic" childless couples should be told the are no longer married.
"logic" denied.
That's the logic of an imbecile.
Marriage is a necessary condition for successful procreation. No one ever said it was a sufficient condition.
They don't revoke your drivers license if you decline to drive.
Oh, I couldn't have gotten women pregnant before marriage? Damn and to think I wasted all that money on condoms.
Another liberal turd who failed to get the point.
Yeah, you can get women pregnant without getting married, and their offspring will probably end up populating one of the state penitentiaries of the country. That may fit with the liberal conception of "successful child rearing," but rational people have a different opinion on the subject.
You stupid partisans REALLY don't like people who think for themselves do you?
If you're thinking for yourself, why are you posting arguments I've heard 10,000 times before?
what arguments are those?
My argument here is basically
mind your own fucking business
Marriage is everyone's business, asshole.
Then you won't mind if I pop on over and make sure you're not having inappropriate sex with your wife eh?
Yeah, right. Be my guest. I'll enjoy watching her cut your balls off.
why would she cut my balls off when marriage is EVERYONE'S business? Those are YOUR words
Marriage and sex are two different things. That you confuse the twoBy your "logic" childless couples should be told the are no longer married.
"logic" denied.
That's the logic of an imbecile.
Marriage is a necessary condition for successful procreation. No one ever said it was a sufficient condition.
They don't revoke your drivers license if you decline to drive.
Oh, I couldn't have gotten women pregnant before marriage? Damn and to think I wasted all that money on condoms.
Another liberal turd who failed to get the point.
Yeah, you can get women pregnant without getting married, and their offspring will probably end up populating one of the state penitentiaries of the country. That may fit with the liberal conception of "successful child rearing," but rational people have a different opinion on the subject.
You stupid partisans REALLY don't like people who think for themselves do you?
If you're thinking for yourself, why are you posting arguments I've heard 10,000 times before?
what arguments are those?
My argument here is basically
mind your own fucking business
Marriage is everyone's business, asshole.
Then you won't mind if I pop on over and make sure you're not having inappropriate sex with your wife eh?
Yeah, right. Be my guest. I'll enjoy watching her cut your balls off.
why would she cut my balls off when marriage is EVERYONE'S business? Those are YOUR words
, shows you are under-educated
By your "logic" childless couples should be told the are no longer married.
"logic" denied.
That's the logic of an imbecile.
Marriage is a necessary condition for successful procreation. No one ever said it was a sufficient condition.
They don't revoke your drivers license if you decline to drive.
Oh, I couldn't have gotten women pregnant before marriage? Damn and to think I wasted all that money on condoms.
Another liberal turd who failed to get the point.
Yeah, you can get women pregnant without getting married, and their offspring will probably end up populating one of the state penitentiaries of the country. That may fit with the liberal conception of "successful child rearing," but rational people have a different opinion on the subject.
You stupid partisans REALLY don't like people who think for themselves do you?
If you're thinking for yourself, why are you posting arguments I've heard 10,000 times before?
what arguments are those?
My argument here is basically
mind your own fucking business
Marriage is everyone's business, asshole.
Then you won't mind if I pop on over and make sure you're not having inappropriate sex with your wife eh?
Yeah, right. Be my guest. I'll enjoy watching her cut your balls off.
why would she cut my balls off when marriage is EVERYONE'S business? Those are YOUR words
Marriage and sex are two different things. That you confuse the two
, shows you are under-educated
Either that or people are legitmately conscerned about the new legal loophole these people may get as a federal mandate to adopt each state's most vulnerable citizens [orphans]. The pictures and raising children don't mix.Why said gays want to be husband and wife? Are you retarded?Gays have no right to marry. Blind people have no right to drive. You have to qualify for the institution or privilege you are seeking. Flatly, gays do not qualify as "husband/wife" "father/mother". And we disqualify them for the sake of children: the most important people involved in a marriage IMHO.Here's to hoping one day when you need help, no one stands up for you because you are such piddly small percentage of deranged homophobic bigots.Gays are a piddly small percentage, given all this attention they are getting, you would think they actually merit all this attention Add to that, they are deranged sexualy, but they can buy good media coverage. The media...that is a different story.
no shit, I thought that was kind of the point of government, keep the many from over running the rights of the few.
and more to the point, who even cares what they call each other?
Children do. "Husband/Wife" "Father/Mother" matters to children... Gays consider these American citizens at most collateral damage inferior to their "rights" to access them to take home alone via the loophole of marriage.
Do you have any proof of this wild theory of yours?
No?
Come back when you do
.
No wait, I'm going to go one further. A study posted somewhere earlier in the thread that showed that a vast majority of homosexuals seeking marriage were women not men, and since we know that MOST pedophiles are men, it pretty much stands to reason that homosexual women probably are not looking to get married to adopt and sexually abuse children.
As you know if any homosexual is granted the right, male homosexuals will get those rights. Besides, the people in the second picture below carrying the perverted signs where children are lined up looking on are women....oops...
Here's your proof that gays must not be allowed the legal loophole of marriage to access orphans:
Look , if you're suggesting prospective parents should have to prove they are capable of raising kids, I'm with you. And none of those dingbats in the pictures you posted probably even want kids. I mean kids are work, wouldn't have time to attend butt flossing contests and such....
I just don't believe "gay" should automatically mean "pedophile"Gays have no right to marry. Blind people have no right to drive. You have to qualify for the institution or privilege you are seeking. Flatly, gays do not qualify as "husband/wife" "father/mother". And we disqualify them for the sake of children: the most important people involved in a marriage IMHO.Here's to hoping one day when you need help, no one stands up for you because you are such piddly small percentage of deranged homophobic bigots.Gays are a piddly small percentage, given all this attention they are getting, you would think they actually merit all this attention Add to that, they are deranged sexualy, but they can buy good media coverage. The media...that is a different story.
no shit, I thought that was kind of the point of government, keep the many from over running the rights of the few.
By your "logic" childless couples should be told the are no longer married.
"logic" denied.
That's the logic of an imbecile.
Marriage is a necessary condition for successful procreation. No one ever said it was a sufficient condition.
They don't revoke your drivers license if you decline to drive.
If you build it, they will come. If you have a thread about queers, especially with pictures of them in parades, the conservatives will come in droves. Works like a charm.
So children with two mothers, one natural and the other adopted you want to spit on them because neither is the father? WOWWhy said gays want to be husband and wife? Are you retarded?Gays have no right to marry. Blind people have no right to drive. You have to qualify for the institution or privilege you are seeking. Flatly, gays do not qualify as "husband/wife" "father/mother". And we disqualify them for the sake of children: the most important people involved in a marriage IMHO.Here's to hoping one day when you need help, no one stands up for you because you are such piddly small percentage of deranged homophobic bigots.Gays are a piddly small percentage, given all this attention they are getting, you would think they actually merit all this attention Add to that, they are deranged sexualy, but they can buy good media coverage. The media...that is a different story.
no shit, I thought that was kind of the point of government, keep the many from over running the rights of the few.
and more to the point, who even cares what they call each other?
Children do. "Husband/Wife" "Father/Mother" matters to children... Gays consider these American citizens at most collateral damage inferior to their "rights" to access them to take home alone via the loophole of marriage.
Birds bees... it happens. Either way incest and abuse is not the same as... gay marriage. Perhaps you are confused by statements such as lesbian and single woman have children with or without being in a heterosexual marriage?Where do homos insist that reproduction has nothing to do with heterosexual marriage? Are you hearing voices?Agreed on the plural issue. What I said is they should be made legal. They were made illegal by the majority in most if not all states. The moral principle that was used was a moral code of particular churches that do not allow plural marriages. Nothing more than opinion of a particular group.From the government perspective the religious marriage has no meaning. The thing that counts is the marriage license, which in fact is a contract you sign when you get married that the government witnesses. So it is contract based.'You have nothing. By the way, are you the wife or the "husband"
"gay marriage"
On the contrary...thanks to my civil marriage and the overturning of part of DOMA, I have over 1,000 rights, benefits and privileges that came with it...like a dependent ID card for my legal spouse.
There is no husband in our relationship. We refer to each other as life partners, but I believe our license says spouse.
See, I think you gays are going about this all wrong. You should be arguing that you have the first amendment to define marriage anyway you like... As for me, since I believe the benefits and such should be contract based not marriage based I couldn't care less what you call yourselves, to me you're two chicks shacking up
gay marriage
IMO the only rule should be that the people on a marriage license are consenting adults. IMO plural marriages should also be made legal.
Why should plural marraiges be illegal if all parties are consenting adults? What's the moral prinicipal involved here? How about incestuous marriages? Should they be illegal?
Incestuous marriages lead to increased numbers of genetic defects in children, and abuse, so IMO yes said couplings should be illegal. Thus, society has decided the harm done to these children and society on the whole should be avoided. It's sort of like safety violations. Even if no harm is done, the act of performing unsafe acts have been made illegal, one at a time.
That would only be an issue if facilitating reproduction was the purpose of marriage. However, homosexuals insist that reproduction has nothing to do with marraigee. Once you admit that it does have something to do with marriage, your arguments for "gay marriage" all go out the window.
They have told me that numerous times right here in this forum when debating them on the issue of gay marriage. Whenever you point out the fact that marriage exists to facilitate the raising of children, and therefore there is no point in giving gays the right to marry, they always come back with the claim that marriage has nothing to do with reproduction.
What part of incest and abuse is confusing you?
Hmmm, the part where, as gays claim, it has nothing to do with marriage.
nor did I confuse a thing, that this post leaves out what I responded to seems to me shows you wish to confuse things.Marriage and sex are two different things. That you confuse the two
, shows you are under-educated
I didn't confuse anything dear, HE wrote that sex was part of marriage, not me.
Then you won't mind if I pop on over and make sure you're not having inappropriate sex with your wife eh?
Marriage is everyone's business, asshole
Nobody is spitting on anybody, can you not make a legit point with logic?So children with two mothers, one natural and the other adopted you want to spit on them because neither is the father? WOWWhy said gays want to be husband and wife? Are you retarded?Gays have no right to marry. Blind people have no right to drive. You have to qualify for the institution or privilege you are seeking. Flatly, gays do not qualify as "husband/wife" "father/mother". And we disqualify them for the sake of children: the most important people involved in a marriage IMHO.Here's to hoping one day when you need help, no one stands up for you because you are such piddly small percentage of deranged homophobic bigots.Gays are a piddly small percentage, given all this attention they are getting, you would think they actually merit all this attention Add to that, they are deranged sexualy, but they can buy good media coverage. The media...that is a different story.
no shit, I thought that was kind of the point of government, keep the many from over running the rights of the few.
and more to the point, who even cares what they call each other?
Children do. "Husband/Wife" "Father/Mother" matters to children... Gays consider these American citizens at most collateral damage inferior to their "rights" to access them to take home alone via the loophole of marriage.
Nobody is spitting on anybody, can you not make a legit point with logic?
Actually someone is getting spit on, the child. All Children need a father and mother.
There can be only one Mother, that you wish to force your broken-thinking on children is what children need to be protected from.
Nobody is spitting on anybody, can you not make a legit point with logic?So children with two mothers, one natural and the other adopted you want to spit on them because neither is the father? WOWWhy said gays want to be husband and wife? Are you retarded?Gays have no right to marry. Blind people have no right to drive. You have to qualify for the institution or privilege you are seeking. Flatly, gays do not qualify as "husband/wife" "father/mother". And we disqualify them for the sake of children: the most important people involved in a marriage IMHO.Here's to hoping one day when you need help, no one stands up for you because you are such piddly small percentage of deranged homophobic bigots.Gays are a piddly small percentage, given all this attention they are getting, you would think they actually merit all this attention Add to that, they are deranged sexualy, but they can buy good media coverage. The media...that is a different story.
no shit, I thought that was kind of the point of government, keep the many from over running the rights of the few.
and more to the point, who even cares what they call each other?
Children do. "Husband/Wife" "Father/Mother" matters to children... Gays consider these American citizens at most collateral damage inferior to their "rights" to access them to take home alone via the loophole of marriage.
Actually someone is getting spit on, the child. All Children need a father and mother.
There can be only one Mother, that you wish to force your broken-thinking on children is what children need to be protected from.
Nobody is spitting on anybody, can you not make a legit point with logic?
Actually someone is getting spit on, the child. All Children need a father and mother.
There can be only one Mother, that you wish to force your broken-thinking on children is what children need to be protected from.
No children don't need a mother and a father. Children do best in two parent households, the gender of the parent is immaterial.
That isn't quite true
male + female = better for children than male + male or female + female but same sex +same sex doen't = abuse or neglect either
I think we would all agree that balance is not a bad thing. For example, having male and female role models is not a bad thing for boys or girls.That isn't quite true
male + female = better for children than male + male or female + female but same sex +same sex doen't = abuse or neglect either
Studies of the subject show you to be wrong.
Do Children Need Both a Mother and a Father?
That isn't quite true
male + female = better for children than male + male or female + female but same sex +same sex doen't = abuse or neglect either
Studies of the subject show you to be wrong.
Do Children Need Both a Mother and a Father?
