The Homosexual Dilemma

[Lilah]

But, we should not lose sight of the fact that the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is a direct threat to our children.

And that is why we can never allow sexual abnormality to be seen as normal... because sexual deviants threaten the health and welfare of children.

So you are advocating that Marcus Bachmann is a sham and the religious right should cease immediately praying away the gay?

 

[mdk]

There's no such thing as "gay" or "homosexual."

It's called: Feral&fel fecal fornicating faggot fellatio-fiend.

Catchy.

 

[bodecea]

There's no such thing as "gay" or "homosexual."

It's called: Feral&fel fecal fornicating faggot fellatio-fiend.

Catchy.

He sure has a purdy mouth.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

But again, you're clueless. As HIV can permeate mucus membranes.

Which would tend to point toward the foolishness of allowing those who succumb to perverse reasoning

Perverse reasoning like this?

No... that's a segment of the reasoning. But once its placed in back in context, wherein it concludes that allowing a sexual deviant access to one's mucous areas... then the answer is, of course: "yes".

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Again... we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that sexual deviancy is a threat to children and THAT is why we can never normalize sexual abnormality.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

There's no such thing as "gay" or "homosexual."

It's called: Feral&fel fecal fornicating faggot fellatio-fiend.

Catchy.

He sure has a purdy mouth.

I didn't use any cuss words to describe their demonically degenerate dung-deeds.

 

[mdk]

There's no such thing as "gay" or "homosexual."

It's called: Feral&fel fecal fornicating faggot fellatio-fiend.

Catchy.

He sure has a purdy mouth.

 

[Lilah]

Again... we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that sexual deviancy is a threat to children and THAT is why we can never normalize sexual abnormality.

Do you think Casey Anthony was a threat to children, particularly her own?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

There's no such thing as "gay" or "homosexual."

It's called: Feral&fel fecal fornicating faggot fellatio-fiend.

Catchy.

He sure has a purdy mouth.

I didn't use any cuss words to describe their demonically degenerate dung-deeds.

Sexual deviancy is intrinsically dirty... so it is the subject that makes the words 'feel' dirty.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Again... we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that sexual deviancy is a threat to children and THAT is why we can never normalize sexual abnormality.

Do you think Casey Anthony was a threat to children, particularly her own?

Was Casey Anthony an individual who uses a perverse species of reasoning which tends to influence her toward rejecting soundly reasoned sexual propriety?

 

[bodecea]

Again... we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that sexual deviancy is a threat to children and THAT is why we can never normalize sexual abnormality.

What is it that is a threat to children? Explain.

 

[Pop23]

Page 245

Just sayin

 

[JakeStarkey]

Keys self describes with " I will suggest you learn to advance only those things which you've some means to support...", because he is citing himself as authority.

He's not, merely some sort of foolish person from the far right having neither objective evidence nor clear analysis while verbosely and shrilly advertising his absolute incompetence in this discussion.

 

[Lilah]

Again... we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that sexual deviancy is a threat to children and THAT is why we can never normalize sexual abnormality.

Do you think Casey Anthony was a threat to children, particularly her own?

Was Casey Anthony an individual who uses a perverse species of reasoning which tends to influence her toward rejecting soundly reasoned sexual propriety?

I believe I asked you the question.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Again... we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that sexual deviancy is a threat to children and THAT is why we can never normalize sexual abnormality.

Do you think Casey Anthony was a threat to children, particularly her own?

Was Casey Anthony an individual who uses a perverse species of reasoning which tends to influence her toward rejecting soundly reasoned sexual propriety?

I believe I asked you the question.

So your position is so fragile that it can't withstand a query seeking clarification?

OH! Now that is SO sad... .

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Again... we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that sexual deviancy is a threat to children and THAT is why we can never normalize sexual abnormality.

What is it that is a threat to children? Explain.

Progressives have lowered age of consent to 13 and 14 in most Eurotrash and South American nations.


Of course, if I elaborate on this any further by providing an entire plethora of historical examples of the slippery fecal-faggot fornicating fellatio fiends moving onto little boys and girls, I'll get banned again for accusing LBGT supporters of being pedophiles.

 

[Lilah]

Again... we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that sexual deviancy is a threat to children and THAT is why we can never normalize sexual abnormality.

Do you think Casey Anthony was a threat to children, particularly her own?

Was Casey Anthony an individual who uses a perverse species of reasoning which tends to influence her toward rejecting soundly reasoned sexual propriety?

I believe I asked you the question.

So your position is so fragile that it can't withstand a query seeking clarification?

OH! Now that is SO sad... .

My question was straightforward and to the point. What's sad is someone who is acting like a pompous arse, and is too intimidated to acknowledge they can't fully comprehend the topic at hand.

 

[bodecea]

Again... we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that sexual deviancy is a threat to children and THAT is why we can never normalize sexual abnormality.

What is it that is a threat to children? Explain.

Progressives have lowered age of consent to 13 and 14 in most Eurotrash and South American nations.


Of course, if I elaborate on this any further by providing an entire plethora of historical examples of the slippery fecal-faggot fornicating fellatio fiends moving onto little boys and girls, I'll get banned again for accusing LBGT supporters of being pedophiles.

Progressives have raised the age of consent in this country...at the same time expanding the civil rights of LBGT citizens. (I know you will ignore that fact)

 

[The2ndAmendment]

There are many demonically degenerate dung-doers fiercely fighting for fel fecal fornicating faggot fiends in this thread.

 

[Skylar]

But again, you're clueless. As HIV can permeate mucus membranes.

Which would tend to point toward the foolishness of allowing those who succumb to perverse reasoning

Perverse reasoning like this?

No... that's a segment of the reasoning.

An invalid, comically inaccurate, ludicrously ignorant, and procedurally faulty segment of reasoning based on the same inept sources and hopelessly broken process that you're using to pinch off the steaming rhetorical pile you're offering to us now.

Namely, you.

If you as a source was so uselessly wrong and factually inept on that point....why would you continue to offer us such an unreliable and clearly inadequate source? That doesn't sound very well reasoned. Desperate, perhaps. But very poorly reasoned.

Do you at least have the capacity to recognize your own inconsistent and factually faulty claims suffecient to admit that this little turd of a 'segment of reasoning' was fallacious?

There has never been a documented case of a heterosexual man having ever contracted HIV, except where the Heterosexual male shared a needle with a homosexual or was given blood tainted by a homosexual.

Where_r_my_keyes

Or will you continue to polish it furiously, even as we point and laugh?

And yes, I am enjoying this!

But once its placed in back in context, wherein it concludes that allowing a sexual deviant access to one's mucous areas... then the answer is, of course: "yes".

And what 'context' makes your claim anything more than a poorly reasoned and factually inaccurate statement of uninformed opinion? Remember, your claims on HIV transmission were utterly insufficient to carry your argument, as you didn't even know that HIV can permeate mucous membranes.

And worse, your inadequate command of the topic led you to base OTHER fallacious assumptions on this foundation of faulty reasoning, where you claimed that there's no way for HIV to be transmitted via normal sex. Which, of course, was blithering nonsense. Of course 'normal sex' can transmit HIV. And in fact heterosexual sex is the single largest method of transmitting HIV in the world.

And thus we get to the bottom of fetid little midden heap you mistook for 'reason'......with the facts that most case of HIV are women. Almost all of whom were infected through heterosexual intercourse. Which you either knew or should have known. And yet starkly ignored, even when presented to you.

Can you see why you citing yourself really doesn't amount to much?