Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Laughing.....

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Skylar]

You are a professed sexual deviant.

Again... the professed sexual deviant, comes to ADVISE you, the reader, that such which is NOT true, as truth.

Do you see how a species of reasoning which seeks to misinform you, is harmful to you?

You are a professed sexual defiant.

False.. I am a demonstrated defiant that abnormality is normality, sexual or otherwise. And a proponent of reality.

You're a proponent of hatred. ...

(Reader, what you've just been 'advised', is that recognizing, respecting, defending and adhering TO the laws of nature, is to the disordered mind: Hatred.

Now, you can clearly see how THAT deviant point is harmful to you, but can you see how harmful it is the very viability of the species?)

'Abhorred'. 'Despised'. 'Loathed'. Those are your words. That's not nature. That's you.

And nature doesn't say a thing about your insististence that unless gays 'sit down and shut the fuck up' that they'll be subject to a war that will make 'hate crimes look like Sunday Brunch'. That's your hatred. Those are your words.

And exactly as I predicted, you try to pass the buck for your own hatred.....this time to nature. Your kind of hatred isn't natural. Its subjective. You chose it. Take some personal responsibility.

Gays and Lesbians are just people. We're not going to strip them of a single right because of your personal animus.

 

[Skylar]

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

Ah, your tell. Now what could you be running from this time? Ah yes.

No one here, in over 800 pages of discussion, has argued that the Left is demanding that Christians 'attend' celebrations of disordered cognition."

Lets see how your relativistic fantasy compared with objective reality:

....if you can force people to attend religious ceremonies that they do not wish to attend, they you can force churches to host religious ceremonies they have no desire to host.

Kosher Girl
Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings Page 810 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Once again, you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about, my little relativist.

 

[beagle9]

Silhouette is delusional- and immune to rational thought- ...

Rational thought?

You're speaking of the 'thought', born from your conclusion, that behavior which not only deviates from the human physiological norm, IT DEVIATES AS FAR FROM THAT STANDARD NORMALITY AS FAR AS CAN BE ACHIEVED WHERE THE SUBJECTS AT ISSUE REMAIN HUMAN! AND WHICH FURTHER DEMANDS THAT THE PROFOUND DEVIANCY BE COUNTED AS "NORMAL".

Gays are lesbians are human. Ending your entire line of reasoning. Next fallacy:

There's nothing in that rationalization, which can be reasonably recognized as being based upon or in accordance with sound reason or valid logic, thus such is not 'rational'.

You simply assume that sex can only serve one purpose: procreation. Just like you assume that marriage can only serve one purpose: procreation. But neither assumption is true. Almost all sex is reproductively useless. And as all the infertile and childless couples being allowed to marry or remain married demonstrate, there's clearly a valid basis of marriage that has nothing to do with children.

Your assumption of exclusivity of purpose is thus a logical fallacy void of reason, clear thought or sensibility.

Next fallacy:

You're speaking of the 'thought', born from your assertion "37 of 50 states have now legalized Gay-Marriage".

We know this because THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE IN THOSE STATES ELECTED THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE LEGISLATORS, WHO LONG DEBATED AND PASSED BILLS, WHICH WERE SIGNED BY THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE GOVERNORS WHO SIGNED INTO LAW: THAT MARRIAGE IS THE JOINING OF ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN!

And any law that violates constitutional guarantees is invalid. As rights trump powers.

What else have you got?

Sex that requires artificial means (i.e safe sex), in order to accommodate the act between two human beings is going to be called what ? 1. An abnormal thing. 2. A normal thing. ? Otherwise when slipping on a condom or what ever else that is needed to keep from catching something, then how is that viewed by humans mostly ? Is it a normal thing or is it an abnormal thing that one is doing when about to have sex ? Why is there so much need now for condoms, and why is this safe sex campaign so emphasized and important these days if it is a normal thing that is found in the order of things ? Tell us your opinion on the now and why as opposed to the days of old maybe.

 

[Syriusly]

Silhouette is delusional- and immune to rational thought- ...

Rational thought?

You're speaking of the 'thought', born from your conclusion, that behavior which not only deviates from the human physiological norm, IT DEVIATES AS FAR FROM THAT STANDARD NORMALITY AS FAR AS CAN BE ACHIEVED WHERE THE SUBJECTS AT ISSUE REMAIN HUMAN! AND WHICH FURTHER DEMANDS THAT THE PROFOUND DEVIANCY BE COUNTED AS "NORMAL".

Gays are lesbians are human. Ending your entire line of reasoning. Next fallacy:

There's nothing in that rationalization, which can be reasonably recognized as being based upon or in accordance with sound reason or valid logic, thus such is not 'rational'.

You simply assume that sex can only serve one purpose: procreation. Just like you assume that marriage can only serve one purpose: procreation. But neither assumption is true. Almost all sex is reproductively useless. And as all the infertile and childless couples being allowed to marry or remain married demonstrate, there's clearly a valid basis of marriage that has nothing to do with children.

Your assumption of exclusivity of purpose is thus a logical fallacy void of reason, clear thought or sensibility.

Next fallacy:

You're speaking of the 'thought', born from your assertion "37 of 50 states have now legalized Gay-Marriage".

We know this because THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE IN THOSE STATES ELECTED THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE LEGISLATORS, WHO LONG DEBATED AND PASSED BILLS, WHICH WERE SIGNED BY THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE GOVERNORS WHO SIGNED INTO LAW: THAT MARRIAGE IS THE JOINING OF ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN!

And any law that violates constitutional guarantees is invalid. As rights trump powers.

What else have you got?

Sex that requires artificial means (i.e safe sex), in order to accommodate the act between two human beings is going to be called what ? 1. An abnormal thing. 2. A normal thing. ? Otherwise when slipping on a condom or what ever else that is needed to keep from catching something, then how is that viewed by humans mostly ? Is it a normal thing or is it an abnormal thing that one is doing when about to have sex ? Why is there so much need now for condoms, and why is this safe sex campaign so emphasized and important these days if it is a normal thing that is found in the order of things ? Tell us your opinion on the now and why as opposed to the days of old maybe.

The use of condoms goes back to the beginning of the 20th century- back when syphilis and gonorreah were the 'AIDS' of their day- and there was no reliable cure.

Syphillis and all STD's are natural- luckily scientists discovered anti-biotics which cured them, and largely eliminated STD's.....for a time.

Why is there a need for condoms now?

Besides preventing pregancy?

To prevent catching among other things:
HIV
Herpes
Syphilis
HPV
Gonoreah
Hep C(?)

Certainly abstinence eliminates the need for condoms, but humans aren't good at abstinence, barely better at monogamy.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Silhouette is delusional- and immune to rational thought- ...

Rational thought?

You're speaking of the 'thought', born from your conclusion, that behavior which not only deviates from the human physiological norm, IT DEVIATES AS FAR FROM THAT STANDARD NORMALITY AS FAR AS CAN BE ACHIEVED WHERE THE SUBJECTS AT ISSUE REMAIN HUMAN! AND WHICH FURTHER DEMANDS THAT THE PROFOUND DEVIANCY BE COUNTED AS "NORMAL".

Gays are lesbians are human. Ending your entire line of reasoning. Next fallacy:

There's nothing in that rationalization, which can be reasonably recognized as being based upon or in accordance with sound reason or valid logic, thus such is not 'rational'.

You simply assume that sex can only serve one purpose: procreation. Just like you assume that marriage can only serve one purpose: procreation. But neither assumption is true. Almost all sex is reproductively useless. And as all the infertile and childless couples being allowed to marry or remain married demonstrate, there's clearly a valid basis of marriage that has nothing to do with children.

Your assumption of exclusivity of purpose is thus a logical fallacy void of reason, clear thought or sensibility.

Next fallacy:

You're speaking of the 'thought', born from your assertion "37 of 50 states have now legalized Gay-Marriage".

We know this because THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE IN THOSE STATES ELECTED THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE LEGISLATORS, WHO LONG DEBATED AND PASSED BILLS, WHICH WERE SIGNED BY THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE GOVERNORS WHO SIGNED INTO LAW: THAT MARRIAGE IS THE JOINING OF ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN!

And any law that violates constitutional guarantees is invalid. As rights trump powers.

What else have you got?

Sex that requires artificial means (i.e safe sex), in order to accommodate the act between two human beings is going to be called what ? 1. An abnormal thing. 2. A normal thing. ? Otherwise when slipping on a condom or what ever else that is needed to keep from catching something, then how is that viewed by humans mostly ? Is it a normal thing or is it an abnormal thing that one is doing when about to have sex ? Why is there so much need now for condoms, and why is this safe sex campaign so emphasized and important these days if it is a normal thing that is found in the order of things ? Tell us your opinion on the now and why as opposed to the days of old maybe.

Well, this is a good point you're making.

The Disordered mind, demanding that sex is purposed for entertainment, has literally rendered sex itself into an excellent conduit of disease and in the case of the demented homosexuals... sex has become an excellent conduit of DEATH. And DESPITE THAT... their disordered minds simply deny that otherwise irrefutable reality.

"THE HIV is not a Homosexual Disease", when in truth, absent homosexuals, there is virtually no means to contract HIV.

Sure the Reader can see that THAT, in and of itself: is Harm perpetrated by the disordered mind of the homosexual.

 

[Jarlaxle]

HEY LOOK! A Deceit, fraudulently advanced as a means to influence the ignorant.

Now MaryL, a professed member of the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality has JUST attempted to HARM ME... through the false assertion that I am a sexual deviant.

Now, if they'll do that to me, why would they not do so to YOU?

They're unprincipled, therefore unreasonable people. Which is what one should reasonably expect of those whose behavior is manifested from a disordered mind.

You have an incredibly over-inflated opinion of your own importance...shared by nobody. You are having delusions of adequacy.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

You have an incredibly over-inflated opinion of your own importance... .

And your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Skylar]

Silhouette is delusional- and immune to rational thought- ...

Rational thought?

You're speaking of the 'thought', born from your conclusion, that behavior which not only deviates from the human physiological norm, IT DEVIATES AS FAR FROM THAT STANDARD NORMALITY AS FAR AS CAN BE ACHIEVED WHERE THE SUBJECTS AT ISSUE REMAIN HUMAN! AND WHICH FURTHER DEMANDS THAT THE PROFOUND DEVIANCY BE COUNTED AS "NORMAL".

Gays are lesbians are human. Ending your entire line of reasoning. Next fallacy:

There's nothing in that rationalization, which can be reasonably recognized as being based upon or in accordance with sound reason or valid logic, thus such is not 'rational'.

You simply assume that sex can only serve one purpose: procreation. Just like you assume that marriage can only serve one purpose: procreation. But neither assumption is true. Almost all sex is reproductively useless. And as all the infertile and childless couples being allowed to marry or remain married demonstrate, there's clearly a valid basis of marriage that has nothing to do with children.

Your assumption of exclusivity of purpose is thus a logical fallacy void of reason, clear thought or sensibility.

Next fallacy:

You're speaking of the 'thought', born from your assertion "37 of 50 states have now legalized Gay-Marriage".

We know this because THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE IN THOSE STATES ELECTED THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE LEGISLATORS, WHO LONG DEBATED AND PASSED BILLS, WHICH WERE SIGNED BY THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE GOVERNORS WHO SIGNED INTO LAW: THAT MARRIAGE IS THE JOINING OF ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN!

And any law that violates constitutional guarantees is invalid. As rights trump powers.

What else have you got?

Sex that requires artificial means (i.e safe sex), in order to accommodate the act between two human beings is going to be called what ? 1. An abnormal thing. 2. A normal thing. ?

A normal thing.

 

[Skylar]

You have an incredibly over-inflated opinion of your own importance... .

And your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

And Keyes' rout begins anew.

That was easy.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Keys, you're hallucinating again.

Everyone but you realizes that you're the crazy fuck running around squeaking "the world is ending!" with a pair of Depends on your head. That is: we are pointing and laughing at you!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Keys, you're hallucinating again.

Everyone but you realizes that you're the crazy fuck running around squeaking "the world is ending!" with a pair of Depends on your head. That is: we are pointing and laughing at you!

OH! A RE-CONCESSION!

(You should know that once you've conceded to the standing points, you aren't required to re-concede to those same points. BUT! It's mighty sweet of you to do so. )

Your re-concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Serious question: are you a remarkably sophisticated spambot, or just a remarkably stupid person?

 

[Skylar]

Keys, you're hallucinating again.

Everyone but you realizes that you're the crazy fuck running around squeaking "the world is ending!" with a pair of Depends on your head. That is: we are pointing and laughing at you!

Ultimately Keyes is just another bigot. The slow attrition of time and the corrosive effects of hate and anger on one's health cleanses our society of such caustic influences. We'll look back at their ilk in 20 years like we do at interracial marriage opponents are looked at now.

 

[Skylar]

Keys, you're hallucinating again.

Everyone but you realizes that you're the crazy fuck running around squeaking "the world is ending!" with a pair of Depends on your head. That is: we are pointing and laughing at you!

OH! A RE-CONCESSION!

(You should know that once you've conceded to the standing points, you aren't required to re-concede to those same points. BUT! It's mighty sweet of you to do so. )

Your re-concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

You're just doubling down on your tell tonight, Keyes. I can always tell when you've reached the limits of your argument when you start your bizarre mantras of 'summary victory'.

While abandoning your silly arguments.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The use of condoms goes back to the beginning of the 20th century- back when syphilis and gonorreah were the 'AIDS' of their day- ... Why is there a need for condoms now? ... To prevent catching among other things: HIV(AIDS) ... Syphilis... Gonoreah [sic]

ROFLMNAO!

You can NOT make this crap up!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

You're just doubling down on your tell tonight, Keyes.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Ultimately Keyes is just another bigot.

Bigotry: intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.

The Reader should recognize the by definition, the use of the word "Bigot" is a demonstration of bigotry.

 

[Skylar]

You're just doubling down on your tell tonight, Keyes.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

Laughing.....and exactly on cue, you've abandoned all your arguments, refuse to discuss the evisceration of your argument....and flee.

Bizarrely 'declaring victory' over your shoulder as you run.

That was easy.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Serious question: are you a remarkably sophisticated spambot, or just a remarkably stupid person?

Oh the coveted RE-Re-concession!

You RE-Re-concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.