Students Celebrate "Anti-Gay Day"

[featherlite]

Anti gay day probably a bad thing but someone has to do something to make the public realize gays are bad. If you only got brainwashed by the social media you'd think being gay was cool and the norm now. I say let gays get married and do their atrocities but don't let them have children!

>>>>>>>>>>

Here is my thing. I don't think gay people are "bad" . I also think 2 loving well adjusted people of any type are capable of raising and loving kids.
The main reason I pay attention to this is a group of friends and I were having a conversation awhile back. I had the NERVE to casually add that I don't really agree with it...so I wont actively support it, but I wont be against it and take others rights away. You would think I had said I want all gays dead from their reaction. None were close friends and none were gay. I was like wtf.
They are the types who in the next breath say they want other things people to just disappear. That's what I hate.

At the core of this whole thing is this...2 men creating love where people defecate is nasty. A woman man creates life. You can add on whatever scenario, toys, anything you like to all this...yet this will always be truth....

People can have beliefs/ views and still want other to be included and have equal rights . <<< I hope this is possible lol... because I feel very strongly about this.

 

[JakeStarkey]

featherlite, you were stating (if I understand it right) that you did not care for the lifestyle, that gay couples were competent to be good parents, but that you would not actively fight for marriage equality.

And you got jumped on as being whatever bad.

I disagree with your lite stance, but I recognize your right to say it and not be jumped on.

The idjits to the far right and the far left are idjits.

 

[Kondor3]

I made valid points about it being unnatural, not deserving tax breaks, and it's repulsive. If those points make me a troll then ya got me. If all else fails, call the people that don't agree with you trolls.

No, you did not. You told us how you feel about it, and that is somehow supposed to probative of what . . . how you feel?

Everything is just a feeling. You just put them into logical thoughts after you've already made your decision based off your feeling. You can rationalize any point of view you want if that's how you feel.

Until the critical thinking and objective evidence cracks that feeling open like an egg over a hot frying pan. Your feeling is not evidence at all, just how you feel.

The evidence of it being unnatural is that partners reproduce. That's the point of couples. The other 2 lack any kind of evidence whatsoever. I think the desire for married people to not receive tax breaks now days is very justifiable to a rational mind.

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

 

[Kondor3]

They can be ordered to wear rainbow stars on their coats.

Nahhhhhh... a Hester Primm -style "H" for "Homo" will suffice.

 

[bodecea]

No, you did not. You told us how you feel about it, and that is somehow supposed to probative of what . . . how you feel?

Everything is just a feeling. You just put them into logical thoughts after you've already made your decision based off your feeling. You can rationalize any point of view you want if that's how you feel.

Until the critical thinking and objective evidence cracks that feeling open like an egg over a hot frying pan. Your feeling is not evidence at all, just how you feel.

The evidence of it being unnatural is that partners reproduce. That's the point of couples. The other 2 lack any kind of evidence whatsoever. I think the desire for married people to not receive tax breaks now days is very justifiable to a rational mind.

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

But not "in your face" heterosexuality?

 

[WinterBorn]

No, you did not. You told us how you feel about it, and that is somehow supposed to probative of what . . . how you feel?

Everything is just a feeling. You just put them into logical thoughts after you've already made your decision based off your feeling. You can rationalize any point of view you want if that's how you feel.

Until the critical thinking and objective evidence cracks that feeling open like an egg over a hot frying pan. Your feeling is not evidence at all, just how you feel.

The evidence of it being unnatural is that partners reproduce. That's the point of couples. The other 2 lack any kind of evidence whatsoever. I think the desire for married people to not receive tax breaks now days is very justifiable to a rational mind.

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

Public sex acts are illegal everywhere in the US that I know of. As for mild PDAs, there is no reason not to allow a couple to hold hands or whatever, regardless of whether they are different or the same genders.

 

[Kondor3]

Everything is just a feeling. You just put them into logical thoughts after you've already made your decision based off your feeling. You can rationalize any point of view you want if that's how you feel.

Until the critical thinking and objective evidence cracks that feeling open like an egg over a hot frying pan. Your feeling is not evidence at all, just how you feel.

The evidence of it being unnatural is that partners reproduce. That's the point of couples. The other 2 lack any kind of evidence whatsoever. I think the desire for married people to not receive tax breaks now days is very justifiable to a rational mind.

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

But not "in your face" heterosexuality?

Precisely.

By Jove, I think you've got it.

 

[Kondor3]

Everything is just a feeling. You just put them into logical thoughts after you've already made your decision based off your feeling. You can rationalize any point of view you want if that's how you feel.

Until the critical thinking and objective evidence cracks that feeling open like an egg over a hot frying pan. Your feeling is not evidence at all, just how you feel.

The evidence of it being unnatural is that partners reproduce. That's the point of couples. The other 2 lack any kind of evidence whatsoever. I think the desire for married people to not receive tax breaks now days is very justifiable to a rational mind.

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

Public sex acts are illegal everywhere in the US that I know of. As for mild PDAs, there is no reason not to allow a couple to hold hands or whatever, regardless of whether they are different or the same genders.

"...the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way..."

 

[WinterBorn]

Until the critical thinking and objective evidence cracks that feeling open like an egg over a hot frying pan. Your feeling is not evidence at all, just how you feel.

The evidence of it being unnatural is that partners reproduce. That's the point of couples. The other 2 lack any kind of evidence whatsoever. I think the desire for married people to not receive tax breaks now days is very justifiable to a rational mind.

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

Public sex acts are illegal everywhere in the US that I know of. As for mild PDAs, there is no reason not to allow a couple to hold hands or whatever, regardless of whether they are different or the same genders.

"...the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way..."

If you have issues with mild displays of affection, then the problem is yours not theirs. If two people in love and together can't hold hands for fear of offending someone, the PC nonsense has gone too far.

 

[Kondor3]

The evidence of it being unnatural is that partners reproduce. That's the point of couples. The other 2 lack any kind of evidence whatsoever. I think the desire for married people to not receive tax breaks now days is very justifiable to a rational mind.

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

Public sex acts are illegal everywhere in the US that I know of. As for mild PDAs, there is no reason not to allow a couple to hold hands or whatever, regardless of whether they are different or the same genders.

"...the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way..."

If you have issues with mild displays of affection, then the problem is yours not theirs. If two people in love and together can't hold hands for fear of offending someone, the PC nonsense has gone too far.

The "PC nonsense" went too far when the US began mainstreaming and normalizing the sexual deviancy and perversity known as homosexuality.

The PC-gone-too-far ship has long-since sailed.

 

[WinterBorn]

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

Public sex acts are illegal everywhere in the US that I know of. As for mild PDAs, there is no reason not to allow a couple to hold hands or whatever, regardless of whether they are different or the same genders.

"...the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way..."

If you have issues with mild displays of affection, then the problem is yours not theirs. If two people in love and together can't hold hands for fear of offending someone, the PC nonsense has gone too far.

The "PC nonsense" went too far when the US began mainstreaming and normalizing the sexual deviancy and perversity known as homosexuality.

The PC-gone-too-far ship has long-since sailed.

Homosexuals are still people, deserving the same freedoms everyone else enjoys. To try and force them back into the closet because you think it is "yucky" goes far beyond PC. And as for the "sexual deviancy and perversity", there are probably more straight couples enjoying those same acts than there are gays in existence.

 

[featherlite]

featherlite, you were stating (if I understand it right) that you did not care for the lifestyle, that gay couples were competent to be good parents, but that you would not actively fight for marriage equality.

And you got jumped on as being whatever bad.

I disagree with your lite stance, but I recognize your right to say it and not be jumped on.

The idjits to the far right and the far left are idjits.

>>>>>>>>
I want all people to have benefits and protection under the law. I just don't see the marriages as completely equal.
I also think its dumb to compare the civil rights movement to gay marriage. Blacks had to fight for everything as far as rights go and they still are.
I was sitting in a meeting the other night for disabled kids...and I would do anything to help these kids feel included. Technically ( and honestly) they aren't totally equal but they deserve every right to participate in anything they can and feel valued.

No I'm not saying homosexuals are disabled but instead of running my opinionated mouth (like I use to lol) Im throwing it all out there....even if it sounds dumb.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, you did not. You told us how you feel about it, and that is somehow supposed to probative of what . . . how you feel?

Everything is just a feeling. You just put them into logical thoughts after you've already made your decision based off your feeling. You can rationalize any point of view you want if that's how you feel.

Until the critical thinking and objective evidence cracks that feeling open like an egg over a hot frying pan. Your feeling is not evidence at all, just how you feel.

The evidence of it being unnatural is that partners reproduce. That's the point of couples. The other 2 lack any kind of evidence whatsoever. I think the desire for married people to not receive tax breaks now days is very justifiable to a rational mind.

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

In your opinion.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Until the critical thinking and objective evidence cracks that feeling open like an egg over a hot frying pan. Your feeling is not evidence at all, just how you feel.

The evidence of it being unnatural is that partners reproduce. That's the point of couples. The other 2 lack any kind of evidence whatsoever. I think the desire for married people to not receive tax breaks now days is very justifiable to a rational mind.

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

Public sex acts are illegal everywhere in the US that I know of. As for mild PDAs, there is no reason not to allow a couple to hold hands or whatever, regardless of whether they are different or the same genders.

"...the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way..."

That's your issue only, not theirs. Better not go outside then, because life is not going to change for you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

Public sex acts are illegal everywhere in the US that I know of. As for mild PDAs, there is no reason not to allow a couple to hold hands or whatever, regardless of whether they are different or the same genders.

"...the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way..."

If you have issues with mild displays of affection, then the problem is yours not theirs. If two people in love and together can't hold hands for fear of offending someone, the PC nonsense has gone too far.

The "PC nonsense" went too far when the US began mainstreaming and normalizing the sexual deviancy and perversity known as homosexuality.

The PC-gone-too-far ship has long-since sailed.

There is no PC and the angst and hatred and perversion is yours.

 

[Kondor3]

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

Public sex acts are illegal everywhere in the US that I know of. As for mild PDAs, there is no reason not to allow a couple to hold hands or whatever, regardless of whether they are different or the same genders.

"...the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way..."

If you have issues with mild displays of affection, then the problem is yours not theirs. If two people in love and together can't hold hands for fear of offending someone, the PC nonsense has gone too far.

The "PC nonsense" went too far when the US began mainstreaming and normalizing the sexual deviancy and perversity known as homosexuality.

The PC-gone-too-far ship has long-since sailed.

There is no PC and the angst and hatred and perversion is yours.

Thank you for your feedback...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Public sex acts are illegal everywhere in the US that I know of. As for mild PDAs, there is no reason not to allow a couple to hold hands or whatever, regardless of whether they are different or the same genders.

"...the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way..."

If you have issues with mild displays of affection, then the problem is yours not theirs. If two people in love and together can't hold hands for fear of offending someone, the PC nonsense has gone too far.

The "PC nonsense" went too far when the US began mainstreaming and normalizing the sexual deviancy and perversity known as homosexuality.

The PC-gone-too-far ship has long-since sailed.

There is no PC and the angst and hatred and perversion is yours.

Thank you for your feedback...

It is good that you take responsibility for your dark side.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Seems a lot of what the lgbt'rs claimed about the events are lies....who'd a thunk

 

[Kondor3]

"...the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way..."

If you have issues with mild displays of affection, then the problem is yours not theirs. If two people in love and together can't hold hands for fear of offending someone, the PC nonsense has gone too far.

The "PC nonsense" went too far when the US began mainstreaming and normalizing the sexual deviancy and perversity known as homosexuality.

The PC-gone-too-far ship has long-since sailed.

There is no PC and the angst and hatred and perversion is yours.

Thank you for your feedback...

It is good that you take responsibility for your dark side.

Thank you for your feedback...

 

[Kondor3]

Everything is just a feeling. You just put them into logical thoughts after you've already made your decision based off your feeling. You can rationalize any point of view you want if that's how you feel.

Until the critical thinking and objective evidence cracks that feeling open like an egg over a hot frying pan. Your feeling is not evidence at all, just how you feel.

The evidence of it being unnatural is that partners reproduce. That's the point of couples. The other 2 lack any kind of evidence whatsoever. I think the desire for married people to not receive tax breaks now days is very justifiable to a rational mind.

Your evidence leads us to conclude that marriage is only for reproduction. It is not at all.

Sexual deviancy and perversity (homosexuality) - the act or the lifestyle or the public manifestation in any way - has no place in public life, and should be kept in the closet, where it belongs.

In your opinion.

Precisely...

An opinion shared by vast numbers of my fellow countrymen...

Sufficient so as to continue articulating it in public against the day when the Nation can begin to reverse the recent legal successes obtained by the Gay Mafia...

Perhaps as early as January 20, 2017...