The Homosexual Dilemma

[Seawytch]

strawman

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.

I didn't say that either, Drama Queen. I'm simply encouraging you. Geez, everything is a battle with you.

 

[bodecea]

Wrong again buddy boy - Americans want to bitch smack the perverts back into the closet - They've pushed the ticket too far and the propaganda and brainwashing are wearing thin.

No- bigots are the only ones who are upset that homosexuals are getting all uppity and no longer put up with you and your three buddies cruising around looking for some 100 lb fem looking boy that you could 'bitch smack' around without the cops interfering with your fun.

Whats a matter faggot - you got beat up alot as a kid ? Perhaps if you'd keep your eyes off the other guys pecker when you in the locker room ........

Hey, we got a tough guy here. I remember a HS classmate who talked like you. He "came out" finally.

The objective of jamming is to force opponents into silence by accusations of homophobia

As opposed to the tactic of homophobic bigots to try to force opponents into silence by accusations of homosexuality- or more in particular in your case- an online pseudo Tourette's Syndrome of insults and implied threats along with a desire to physically harm homosexuals.

Ironically, with more and more gays coming out of the closet, that tactic no longer works.

 

[Seawytch]

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.

Gays DO have children...I've had five. Why are our families less deserving of the rights, benefits and privileges of civil marriage?

Also, can you please name for us the state or locality that requires procreation in order to apply for a civil marriage license? Can you cite one instance of a civil marriage license being revoked due to the couple's inability or refusal to procreate?

Yet another strawman. Nobody's claiming that procreation is a requirement for marriage. What we are saying is that when you deliberately construct a union that can't produce children, you shouldn't have the right to abuse children by sucking them into your deviant apparatus utilizing artificial means.

People deliberately enter into civil marriages all the time that have no intention of producing children. You want to deny gays civil marriage for a reason you would not deny it to straights.

Do you want to take away our children?

 

[Seawytch]

Well, I adopted our daughter in order to protect my parental rights. Why does ANYONE "need" to adopt children? Answer than one.

My guess is that you adopted your daughter because you fucked up. Is that right?

Mark

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.

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.

Really? So the millions of heterosexuals that use IVF and AI are "selfish" and "delusional" as well? Our children have two parents, which studies have shown provides the best outcomes for children, two parents.

Why did you have children? I'm going to bet you dollars to donuts that you did it for all the same reasons that gays have children. Do you want to take our children away from us?

I married a woman, therefore setting into play a union that can bring children into the world. You deliberately set up a union that can't under any condition produce children naturally. The law should prohibited people like you from having children, deliberately depriving them of a father or a mother.

Good luck with that, Fascist.

 

[Seawytch]

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.

Except it isn't legally...and never has been religiously. I attended a lesbian wedding at a Southern Baptist Church in 1986...long before any legal recognition.


20 years from now, Catholic Churches will be marrying gays, you watch.

Actually the Catholic Church has demonstrated it can remain true to its teachings impervious to the tide of popular trends. This isn't the first battle we've had with a depraved culture engrossed in homosexuality.

Uh huh...that's why meat in Friday's are still a sin and un baptized babies are still in purgatory, right?

 

[Skylar]

My guess is that you adopted your daughter because you fucked up. Is that right?

Mark

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.

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.

Really? So the millions of heterosexuals that use IVF and AI are "selfish" and "delusional" as well? Our children have two parents, which studies have shown provides the best outcomes for children, two parents.

Why did you have children? I'm going to bet you dollars to donuts that you did it for all the same reasons that gays have children. Do you want to take our children away from us?

I married a woman, therefore setting into play a union that can bring children into the world. You deliberately set up a union that can't under any condition produce children naturally. The law should prohibited people like you from having children, deliberately depriving them of a father or a mother.

Good luck with that, Fascist.

He also thinks blowjobs are an abomination. So consider the source.

 

[Syriusly]

Sorry Pal "Homophobic Bigots" a/k/a informed free thinkers are not the ones molesting Children - Perverts a/k/a LGBT are..

Prove it.

Been there & done that bitch - when you can demonstrate that you are able to comprehend the basic tenets of Mathematical theory - such as percentages and per capita perhaps I'll fly it by you again -in the mean time fkoff.

I see you ignored my stats on 1 in 4 girls being sexually abused before 18.....I bet you blame that on gays too....instead of their fathers, their step-fathers, their other relatives and family friends.

It's been addressed in the past - which you have continuosly ignored - heteros are 95% of the population gay men are 2 to 3% yet are responsible for about 35% of all child molestation - golly gee wilikers you slimy dike whore - you see something odd there -or perhaps you're like the majority of LGBT perverts and believ that children have a right to experience "inter-generational intimacy" you rancid slimy dike bitch FK U

Save of course, that your numbers don't hold up. As when we look at the actual molesters, less than 1% are gay. With more than 99% self identifying as heterosexual. And 3 in 4 molesters of boys being heterosexual men that were in a heterosexual sexual relationship with the mother or female relative of the boy. And self identified as heterosexual.

You ignore these facts. But you can't make us ignore them. Nor can you make your claims even make sense.

A man who is sexually attracted to women, in sexual relationships with women, who self identifies as heterosexual......is a gay man?

Laughing.....that's just silly.

As an actual father of a daughter his posts- and posts like his from his homophobic fellow travellers piss me off.

The fact is that any girl is between 2 times and 10 times more likely to be molested than any boy.

All child molestation is horrible- but homophobic bigots only seem to notice that it happens to boys.

My daughter is 2 to 10 times more likely to be molested than any random boy is- and the bigots just don't care whether molesters are out there molesting girls.

But where these bastards really endanger kids is by telling everyone it is the gays that parents should be scared of.

By doing that they encourage parents to think that openly heterosexual macho icons like Jerry Sandusky- married and a father- are safe- since he isn't a homosexual- so they just dropped their boys off with him for a quick shower.

Assholes like Greenbean put kids at risk by targetting homosexuals as child molesters. Every time they do that, they are giving a green light to parents that they have nothing to worry about from the boy scout leader as long as he is married and has kids.

 

[bodecea]

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.

Except it isn't legally...and never has been religiously. I attended a lesbian wedding at a Southern Baptist Church in 1986...long before any legal recognition.


20 years from now, Catholic Churches will be marrying gays, you watch.

Actually the Catholic Church has demonstrated it can remain true to its teachings impervious to the tide of popular trends. This isn't the first battle we've had with a depraved culture engrossed in homosexuality.

Uh huh...that's why meat in Friday's are still a sin and un baptized babies are still in purgatory, right?

And Mass is still in Latin.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Nope, you said we are "only making rules for the general population".

Well "rules" are rules, either they apply or they don't. If the rule is that you have to be able to procreate with the other member of the couple. That's fine. Apply the same rule equally. On the other hand if there are exceptions to the rule for different-sex couples that can't procreate, then equal exceptions should be allowed for same-sex couples that can't procreate. (Of course that means there really isn't a "rule" doesn't it.)


>>>>


>>>>

You are one stupid shit who cant read. That much is obvious.

I read just fine. As demonstrated by your need to revert to personal insults when a point is logically refuted.

The point was a double-standard was to be applied. Different-sex couples that cannot (or required not to) procreate are exempted from the "rule". But the "rule" applies to same-sex couples barring them from the same Civil Marriage available to different-sex couples.

Clearly the application of a double-standard.


>>>>

No, you read what you want. I wrote the word "tend" specifically to foil moves like yours. You didnt get the memo. Get back to me when you understand the argument.

No, you are attempting to apply a double-standard, whether you use the word "tend" or not is irrelevant. Same-sex couples are raising children whether there is Civil Marriage available or not, but because they can't procreate together - they should be denied Civil Marriage. Different-sex couples should be allowed to Civilly Marry with the ability to procreate together not being a factor and despite that for some couple they are required not to be able to procreate.

I understand the argument just fine. A double-standard.


>>>>

I stopped reading...

"I stopped reading..." was really all you needed to say after the double-standard was made obvious.


>>>>

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

What's with you and procreation?

The means by which the species is propagated? I'm for it... where such is exercised with respect for and adherence to the natural principles that
Do you display such vigorous passion for say someone like Nadya Suleman, who has given birth to 14 children and is unable to care for them economically, as well as physically, mentally, and emotionally. Would you personally be averse to having someone adopting her children if that's what she wanted? Would you find it offensive if a couple adopted a child or children from a third-world country?
The sun produces energy, and all you're producing is stagnant hot air.[/QUOTE]

Two women may not be able to have a child naturally without technological help....BUT that is no basis for legal discrimination. See how simple that is?

It's not discrimination. Two women can get married and have all the benefits the government confers, as long as they get married to two men.
See how easy that is?

This isn't exactly a very compelling legal argument. Which it is why it is being laughed out of most courtrooms across the country.

Argumentum ad populum fallacy!
Rabbi rules!

While I find your delusions of grandeur comical, it in no way changes the fact that your position is failing miserably.

I point out your argument is a logical fallacy and Im the one failing? No, dont think so.

It is discrimination against gays, dufus.

Yes... it is. That's what standards do. They discriminate. And FYI: Discrimination is an essential trait to human viability. No discrimination, no humanity.


But hey, Nature discriminates against the sexually abnormal all the time.

Have ya heard of the HIV? It's the virus that nature sets upon the Sexually abnormal, that causes AIDS.

Then there's the chronic STDs, the disproportionate instances of Urinary tract infections, etc etc... .

You gonna sue God to get JUSTICE?


OH! Here's a thought, stop shoving organs designed as an out-port, for penetration into in-ports ... into out ports.
Just because you 'feel' a desire to do so, doesn't mean ya should. And that nature discriminates those who DO... odds are it's a really bad idea. And this without regard to the popular whimsy, which says 'it's ok'.

Because, nature says, it's not ok.

 

[Skylar]

But Nature discriminates against the sexually abnormal all the time. Have ya heard of HIV? It's the virus that nature sets upon the Sexually abnormal, that causes AIDS.

You're aware that the majority of the victims of HIV.....are women, right? And those who have had heterosexual sex.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Where R My Keys simple asserts opinion as proof and then makes an appeal to emotion as well as an appeal to disease (HV) ignoring that the majority of victims are female who have heterosexual relations.

He has every right to what he thinks, but he is not effective in the slightest in arguing against marriage equality,

 

[Syriusly]

But Nature discriminates against the sexually abnormal all the time. Have ya heard of HIV? It's the virus that nature sets upon the Sexually abnormal, that causes AIDS..

You are such an idiot.

Before there was HIV, before there were anti-biotics- there was Syphillis.

Syphillis was HIV before the days of anti-biotics- a chronic, ultimately deadly STD, that had as a lovely side affect driving the sufferers crazy.

You would have loved it.

Except the primary sufferers were straight.

STD's affect humans who have sex.

Bigots like yourself applaud them when homosexuals are the sufferers.

 

[Syriusly]

But Nature discriminates against the sexually abnormal all the time. Have ya heard of HIV? It's the virus that nature sets upon the Sexually abnormal, that causes AIDS.

You're aware that the majority of the victims of HIV.....are women, right? And those who have had heterosexual sex.

Bigots never care.

Bigots like him see AIDs as gods wrath on homosexuals- and ignore the inconvenient details like children dying from it.

 

[Gadawg73]

No one with a mind that is occupied productively gives a shit about gay folk getting married. Let them be miserable like the rest of us. Gay marriage is a real issue for the future of America. On my list of priorities I have moved it up from 173rd to 168th. As soon as we solve the other priorities we will get to the gay marriage issue. Until then we will follow The United States Constitution which does not mention marriage. Accordingly, it is legal for them to get a marriage license and marry who they legally fall in love with.

 

[Gadawg73]

If God wanted to unleash his wrath on homosexuals he never would have made them attracted to the same sex.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

WHERE_R_MY_KEYS SAID:

“But Nature discriminates against the sexually abnormal all the time. Have ya heard of HIV? It's the virus that nature sets upon the Sexually abnormal, that causes AIDS.”

As already correctly noted, you truly are an idiot.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

No one with a mind that is occupied productively gives a shit about gay folk getting married.

That is SO true.

Just as no one with a mind that is occupied productively, give a shit about people who can't accept Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

Gay marriage ...

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

gay marriage

Marriage... is the joining of one man and one woman.

 

[Skylar]

No one with a mind that is occupied productively gives a shit about gay folk getting married.

That is SO true.

Just as no one with a mind that is occupied productively, give a shit about people who can't accept Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman.

And you keep believing that. Meanwhile, gays and lesbians still get married every day throughout the country. Where same sex marriages are performed in 36 States, in recognized in 48.

You get your beliefs. They get their rights and recognition.

Sounds like a win win to me.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

WHERE_R_MY_KEYS SAID:

“But Nature discriminates against the sexually abnormal all the time. Have ya heard of HIV? It's the virus that nature sets upon the Sexually abnormal, that causes AIDS.”
As already correctly noted, you truly are an idiot.

LOL! I SO adore the sweeter ironies.

Yes... lets pretend that anyone can contract HIV. And that doing so without a homosexual in the mix, somewhere... the odds are non-existent.

So once again, all one needs to do to believe the Left, is to suspend all sense of reality.