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.
Totally incorrect. She was lovingly planned by my wife and I. She had her...I adopted her. One of the best things in our lives.Well, I adopted our daughter in order to protect my parental rights. Why does ANYONE "need" to adopt children? Answer than one.Why do gays NEED to adopt children, again? this itself seems like a phony argument that becomes a self fulfilling rationalization, along the lines of: Gays need rights because they have children so we need to protect that, because they LOVE their children and their spouses....That is the most irrational cyclical argument floating out in internet land. Gays can't HAVE children, there for, they don't need parental rights, which is all marriage comes down to. Period, it is that simple.
My guess is that you adopted your daughter because you fucked up. Is that right?
Mark
Where's her father? Whether you got sperm at a sperm bank or have a father that you keep out of the picture, one way or another you perverted the natural order to have your arrangement and delusion. It was entirely a self centered act.
Isn't it horrible that they cannot discriminate legally against gay citizens anymore?Are you sensing the underlying current here?The legislature defines that and age of consent.Children can not legally consent.
Define children.Mark
You have no worry in your absurd world about pedophiles and age of consent.
You are absurd, absurd, absurd.
The children of the next generation of your religious groups are going to be saying, "Our parents were meat heads."
The desperation of fear and sweat of seeing Defeat bearing down.
We had a sperm donor....a wonderful service that was actually generated decades ago for childless straight couples and now also used by gay couples.Totally incorrect. She was lovingly planned by my wife and I. She had her...I adopted her. One of the best things in our lives.Well, I adopted our daughter in order to protect my parental rights. Why does ANYONE "need" to adopt children? Answer than one.Why do gays NEED to adopt children, again? this itself seems like a phony argument that becomes a self fulfilling rationalization, along the lines of: Gays need rights because they have children so we need to protect that, because they LOVE their children and their spouses....That is the most irrational cyclical argument floating out in internet land. Gays can't HAVE children, there for, they don't need parental rights, which is all marriage comes down to. Period, it is that simple.
My guess is that you adopted your daughter because you fucked up. Is that right?
Mark
Where's her father? Whether you got sperm at a sperm bank or have a father that you keep out of the picture, one way or another you perverted the natural order to have your arrangement and delusion. It was entirely a self centered act.
The Homosexual Dilemma exists only in the minds of those who dislike marriage equality, much like folks who disliked interracial marriage.
Tough for them back then and tough for you today because we are never going back.
Get over it and don't marry someone you don't love is the best advice you can get.
Is that why 1 in 4 girls are sexually abused before they reach 18?Incorrect.
That you perceive homosexuality as 'abnormal' is subjective...
That is LUDICROUS!
There is no more objective standard than the standard of the human physiological design.
That design provides that the human sexuality norm is comprised of two complimenting genders.
Not only does Homosexuality DEVIATE FROM THAT NORM: IT DEVIATES AS FAR FROM THE NORM AS IS POSSIBLE, WHERE THE SEXUALITY SUBJECT IS CONTAINED TO "HUMAN BEINGS".
In fact: Hetero-sexual pedophilia is LITERALLY a smaller deviation from that standard than homosexuality.
Therefore, Homosexuality is a FAR greater indicator of sexual abnormality, and that homosexual pedophilia is so massively disproportionate than hetero-sexual pedophilia, demonstrates such PERFECTLY.
Setting to lie, the APA 'feelings' that homosexuality is not a function of a mental disorder, as it is the purest presentation of precisely that.
That's what keys has been saying.He's already argued that there are loveless hetero marriages."the person they love" seriously?
Give me another law that changes based on what someone wants.
Here's the dealio: For every single point made in arguing for gay marriage, the exact same argument can be made for unlimited plural marriage.
Come to think of it...all those arguments apply to hetero marriage too - OMG - why have ANY marriage?
And yet...and yet. If the government doesn't have the right to deny two people equal rights, how then does it have the right to deny millions, or billions?
Reality.
We can take anything - any law - to the point of absurbity. But the chances of it happening are virtually nil. So because of that do you have no laws?
I don't have an issue with polygamy if people want it. But that's also another argument. If people want polygamy then they need to make a compelling case for it on it's own merits. The case for same sex marriage is being argued on it's own merits - not alongside polygamy.
When we allow homosexuals to marry, we are taking law to the point of absurdity. And, less than 20 years ago, everyone thought the chances of it happening were virtually nil.
It appears you "logic" has serious flaws in it.
Mark
Not desperate at all.....the picture of the peg board reminded me of that GREAT article of his. Focus on the Family Jewels.I put a quote in there....did you not see it?Not lying at all. He did say that as I quoted. Did you take the time to read the entire piece? Doesn't seem like you had enough time to before replying.So you admit you were lying about James Dobson, as nothing you cited confirms what you claimed he said.
You are the demonic Left.
I'm a fast reader. Plus I've been a devoted reader of James Dobson for over 20 years and know what he teaches. Why don't you quote exactly where he says what you claimed he said? I can't prove a negative, you idiot.
So you like the ideas of showering with Jr. and show him the family jewels?
You said:
That reminds me of that Focus on the Family article where the Founder, James Dodson suggested that fathers shower with their young sons, show them their penis' and that would keep them straight. He also suggested that parents teach boys to pound round pegs in round holes to keep them straight too.
Not quite the same, it's not an act of exhibitionism.
And by the way, my own family is "clothing optional" and as such, human body parts are not a scandal, not obscene, and not something to be hidden like a dark secret. The power of sexual perversion is the pretense of obscenity that shouldn't exist. If that's the worst you have on James Dobson, you are getting VERY desperate.
Not desperate at all.....the picture of the peg board reminded me of that GREAT article of his. Focus on the Family Jewels.I put a quote in there....did you not see it?Not lying at all. He did say that as I quoted. Did you take the time to read the entire piece? Doesn't seem like you had enough time to before replying.
I'm a fast reader. Plus I've been a devoted reader of James Dobson for over 20 years and know what he teaches. Why don't you quote exactly where he says what you claimed he said? I can't prove a negative, you idiot.
So you like the ideas of showering with Jr. and show him the family jewels?
You said:
That reminds me of that Focus on the Family article where the Founder, James Dodson suggested that fathers shower with their young sons, show them their penis' and that would keep them straight. He also suggested that parents teach boys to pound round pegs in round holes to keep them straight too.
Not quite the same, it's not an act of exhibitionism.
And by the way, my own family is "clothing optional" and as such, human body parts are not a scandal, not obscene, and not something to be hidden like a dark secret. The power of sexual perversion is the pretense of obscenity that shouldn't exist. If that's the worst you have on James Dobson, you are getting VERY desperate.
If you think nudity in the family is obscene or scandalous, you prove your own sexual perversion. James Dobson was talking to an audience not besotted by the perversion holding sway over you.
Civil rights are civil rights regardless whether it is based on race or gender or religion or national origin or handicap condition. And yes, some blacks get upset. If you were around in the 70s, some of them were upset about the comparison of the black civil rights movement and the women's rights movement. Everyone wants to feel that their struggle is unique.The Homosexual Dilemma exists only in the minds of those who dislike marriage equality, much like folks who disliked interracial marriage.
Tough for them back then and tough for you today because we are never going back.
Get over it and don't marry someone you don't love is the best advice you can get.
Once again jaketherightwinger, does it need explained to you that being black and being gay are not the same thing by a long shot? How long are the blacks going to take the insults from left wing operatives. I really have to wonder what is wrong with blacks that ignore such insults.
Now now.....apparently family nudity is healthy.Dobson is a creepy pervert.
Read his words about men in the shower with their sons and talking about penis size.
He is a pedophile in lust waiting his time: poor boys.
Especially the part about Daddy taking Jr. into the shower to show him his big penis so he doesn't turn gay.
Would you like to have a rational discussion on this? I married a very liberal wife who introduced me to family naturism, the natural way she was raised. For those who have perverted minds that can't separate sex from nudity, this would be a scandal, which apparently it is for you. Not very progressive of you, is it? So exactly what problem do you have with family naturism?
If you can't have a rational, non combative discussion on this, please just tell me.
Mr. Mendacious admits defeat and runs away.
Marriage Equality will happen before fall nationwide.
The USA has had marriage equality for years. A union of two men or two women is not a marriage any more than a union of 6 men and 8 women is a marriage, or a union of a man and his horse is a marriage.
A marriage is one man and one woman----------always has been, always will be.
And yet we allow quicky marriages and the marriages of criminals.The best standards are the Golden Rule and ensure that what you do harms no others. How hard is that?SAINTMICHAELDEFENDTHEM SAID:
“But there's just as much right to shag a child as their is for gay marriage in the Constitution, so why not?Do you hear those footsteps behind you? It's NAMBLA marching proudly through all the doors you opened for them. That's what happens when "rights" are made up. I bet they even start winning some court battles because, after all, not being allowed to bugger children is a violation of the 14th Amendment, using the twisted logic of the Left.”
This fails as a slippery slope fallacy, and in fact is a lie.
There is no fallacious potential, where the appeal to the slippery nature of the slope, exists.
That the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is a very real and very determined movement, who goals are to strip the Western Culture of all standards of sexual propriety.
Your own public professions are further evidence of this, in that where you have the opportunity to state the standards which you recognize as being essential... you merely denied that what is inarguably happening, is not happening.
So we can rest assured that your position is either one from ignorance, or that it is one from deceit.
Either way, it's deceptive... thus an invalid form of discourse where the purpose is the pursuit of the truth.
Gay marriage harms society by putting abnormal behavior on a par with normal behavior.
And yet we allow quicky marriages and the marriages of criminals.The best standards are the Golden Rule and ensure that what you do harms no others. How hard is that?SAINTMICHAELDEFENDTHEM SAID:
“But there's just as much right to shag a child as their is for gay marriage in the Constitution, so why not?Do you hear those footsteps behind you? It's NAMBLA marching proudly through all the doors you opened for them. That's what happens when "rights" are made up. I bet they even start winning some court battles because, after all, not being allowed to bugger children is a violation of the 14th Amendment, using the twisted logic of the Left.”
This fails as a slippery slope fallacy, and in fact is a lie.
There is no fallacious potential, where the appeal to the slippery nature of the slope, exists.
That the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is a very real and very determined movement, who goals are to strip the Western Culture of all standards of sexual propriety.
Your own public professions are further evidence of this, in that where you have the opportunity to state the standards which you recognize as being essential... you merely denied that what is inarguably happening, is not happening.
So we can rest assured that your position is either one from ignorance, or that it is one from deceit.
Either way, it's deceptive... thus an invalid form of discourse where the purpose is the pursuit of the truth.
Gay marriage harms society by putting abnormal behavior on a par with normal behavior.
Civil rights are civil rights regardless whether it is based on race or gender or religion or national origin or handicap condition. And yes, some blacks get upset. If you were around in the 70s, some of them were upset about the comparison of the black civil rights movement and the women's rights movement. Everyone wants to feel that their struggle is unique.The Homosexual Dilemma exists only in the minds of those who dislike marriage equality, much like folks who disliked interracial marriage.
Tough for them back then and tough for you today because we are never going back.
Get over it and don't marry someone you don't love is the best advice you can get.
Once again jaketherightwinger, does it need explained to you that being black and being gay are not the same thing by a long shot? How long are the blacks going to take the insults from left wing operatives. I really have to wonder what is wrong with blacks that ignore such insults.
Civil rights are civil rights regardless whether it is based on race or gender or religion or national origin or handicap condition. And yes, some blacks get upset. If you were around in the 70s, some of them were upset about the comparison of the black civil rights movement and the women's rights movement. Everyone wants to feel that their struggle is unique.The Homosexual Dilemma exists only in the minds of those who dislike marriage equality, much like folks who disliked interracial marriage.
Tough for them back then and tough for you today because we are never going back.
Get over it and don't marry someone you don't love is the best advice you can get.
Once again jaketherightwinger, does it need explained to you that being black and being gay are not the same thing by a long shot? How long are the blacks going to take the insults from left wing operatives. I really have to wonder what is wrong with blacks that ignore such insults.
If this is true then why don't I ever hear the comparison of Gay rights to women's rights?
No one brought gays here as slaves. No one denied gays the right to vote. No one fought a war to free gays. If we go under the presumption that being gay is a choice then fine, but parading down the street or announcing a person's gayness certainly is a choice. I person can keep their gayness to themselves, if they so wish, it is their choice, it is their freedom. A black man can't keep his color to themselves.
I am all for equal rights in hiring, education or any other program provided by the government, regardless of sexual persuasion. But don't try and tell me that marriage, as always defined by law, is anything other then between a man and a woman.
Then you haven't been listening. The two have been compared quite a bit....don't we say again and again that it's an issue of gender equality? Just. Like. The. Women's. Movement. And the rights of women and the rights of lesbians have been closely entwined since the beginning, sometimes unhappily....but it's been there. Some of the gays' best allies are women from the women's movement. Some of our worst enemies are enemies of the women's movement too. Phyllis Schlafly comes to mind right there.Civil rights are civil rights regardless whether it is based on race or gender or religion or national origin or handicap condition. And yes, some blacks get upset. If you were around in the 70s, some of them were upset about the comparison of the black civil rights movement and the women's rights movement. Everyone wants to feel that their struggle is unique.The Homosexual Dilemma exists only in the minds of those who dislike marriage equality, much like folks who disliked interracial marriage.
Tough for them back then and tough for you today because we are never going back.
Get over it and don't marry someone you don't love is the best advice you can get.
Once again jaketherightwinger, does it need explained to you that being black and being gay are not the same thing by a long shot? How long are the blacks going to take the insults from left wing operatives. I really have to wonder what is wrong with blacks that ignore such insults.
If this is true then why don't I ever hear the comparison of Gay rights to women's rights?
No one brought gays here as slaves. No one denied gays the right to vote. No one fought a war to free gays. If we go under the presumption that being gay is a choice then fine, but parading down the street or announcing a person's gayness certainly is a choice. I person can keep their gayness to themselves, if they so wish, it is their choice, it is their freedom. A black man can't keep his color to themselves.
I am all for equal rights in hiring, education or any other program provided by the government, regardless of sexual persuasion. But don't try and tell me that marriage, as always defined by law, is anything other then between a man and a woman.
What is a "strawman" about actually doing something about your beliefs?strawmanNo I haven't. I think you should advocate your views MORE. I don't think just sniveling about how gays get exactly what you get is enough and that you should be picketing county clerk offices. I mean, how dedicated to stopping "gubmit" marriage are you? (outside your own, of course)
That's his standard response to anything he finds too uncomfortable to answer...that and "begging the question".
Strawman.
They are actually specific answers, if you don't know what they mean, google them.
They are the two primary tools in your belt, which is why you get them so often. You say I said things I didn't say (strawman) like here where you ask me "what is a "strawman" about actually doing something about your beliefs?" I never said that nor anything like it. So I informed you specifically it was a strawman.
You also like to ignore my answer and repeat your question assuming the truth of your own position, which is begging the question. Since I've already addressed it, I inform you of that by telling you that you begged the question, so if you want to go back and actually address my argument I'll give you more.
In both cases, you ignored what I actually said. Then you whine I don't address your non-response. You want an actual response from me? Give me an actual response to my point.
I'm aware of what they mean and I know why you use them. I agree, you've addressed everything. Now get out there and push your agenda. Picket those county clerks...we did.
That's what keys has been saying.He's already argued that there are loveless hetero marriages.
Here's the dealio: For every single point made in arguing for gay marriage, the exact same argument can be made for unlimited plural marriage.
Come to think of it...all those arguments apply to hetero marriage too - OMG - why have ANY marriage?
And yet...and yet. If the government doesn't have the right to deny two people equal rights, how then does it have the right to deny millions, or billions?
Reality.
We can take anything - any law - to the point of absurbity. But the chances of it happening are virtually nil. So because of that do you have no laws?
I don't have an issue with polygamy if people want it. But that's also another argument. If people want polygamy then they need to make a compelling case for it on it's own merits. The case for same sex marriage is being argued on it's own merits - not alongside polygamy.
When we allow homosexuals to marry, we are taking law to the point of absurdity. And, less than 20 years ago, everyone thought the chances of it happening were virtually nil.
It appears you "logic" has serious flaws in it.
Mark
And you just stepped full footed into what is commonly referred to as a slippery slope fallacy. If you give a mouse a cookie, you don't have to do all the other things. Allowing non familial consenting adult couples to civilly marry is not going to lead to cats and dogs living together anymore than not locking up first time drug offenders will not lead to legalized murder.
Put your skirt back on, Nancy, the house isn't on fire.
If one feels strongly about something, they do something about it. You just like to kvetch?What is a "strawman" about actually doing something about your beliefs?strawman
That's his standard response to anything he finds too uncomfortable to answer...that and "begging the question".
Strawman.
They are actually specific answers, if you don't know what they mean, google them.
They are the two primary tools in your belt, which is why you get them so often. You say I said things I didn't say (strawman) like here where you ask me "what is a "strawman" about actually doing something about your beliefs?" I never said that nor anything like it. So I informed you specifically it was a strawman.
You also like to ignore my answer and repeat your question assuming the truth of your own position, which is begging the question. Since I've already addressed it, I inform you of that by telling you that you begged the question, so if you want to go back and actually address my argument I'll give you more.
In both cases, you ignored what I actually said. Then you whine I don't address your non-response. You want an actual response from me? Give me an actual response to my point.
I'm aware of what they mean and I know why you use them. I agree, you've addressed everything. Now get out there and push your agenda. Picket those county clerks...we did.
So my choices are to demonstrate or shut up. I reject that as the crap that it is. I think my strategy is far more effective, changing minds. Not your mind, you are an ideologue, your intelligence is not in play. But I get comments all the time from people that they always assumed that this or that had to be a government function because it is, and I had a valid point that maybe it didn't need to be. That to me is a huge win every time it happens.
If one feels strongly about something, they do something about it. You just like to kvetch?What is a "strawman" about actually doing something about your beliefs?
That's his standard response to anything he finds too uncomfortable to answer...that and "begging the question".
Strawman.
They are actually specific answers, if you don't know what they mean, google them.
They are the two primary tools in your belt, which is why you get them so often. You say I said things I didn't say (strawman) like here where you ask me "what is a "strawman" about actually doing something about your beliefs?" I never said that nor anything like it. So I informed you specifically it was a strawman.
You also like to ignore my answer and repeat your question assuming the truth of your own position, which is begging the question. Since I've already addressed it, I inform you of that by telling you that you begged the question, so if you want to go back and actually address my argument I'll give you more.
In both cases, you ignored what I actually said. Then you whine I don't address your non-response. You want an actual response from me? Give me an actual response to my point.
I'm aware of what they mean and I know why you use them. I agree, you've addressed everything. Now get out there and push your agenda. Picket those county clerks...we did.
So my choices are to demonstrate or shut up. I reject that as the crap that it is. I think my strategy is far more effective, changing minds. Not your mind, you are an ideologue, your intelligence is not in play. But I get comments all the time from people that they always assumed that this or that had to be a government function because it is, and I had a valid point that maybe it didn't need to be. That to me is a huge win every time it happens.
