The Homosexual Dilemma

[GreenBean]

I'm laughing because Left-think is the perspective of the irrationally subjective female, thus as with all comedy, it's funny, because it's true.

So you are highly concerned with subjective females. Says a lot about you.

Does it?

LOL! OK...

Pray tell, what does it say?

You couldn't take it.

So... Ya got nuttin'?

Color me SHOCKED!

I would most definitely color you yellow to match the streak down your back.

It takes a lot of courage to stand up to the Fag Militia -it doesn't take much to run with the perverted pack - which is basically all you're doing -

 

[GreenBean]

stmike's been this, done that on the net, he is the real deal. So he says. No, he is not, and obviously no one can trust him. He is out only for himself.

Once again, stmike, you suffer no harm from marriage equality, none.

Oh, good. For a moment there I thought you forgot what we were discussing.

Senior moment.

Marriage equality existed before gay marriage. You can't prove discrimination where none existed.

I only have 2 people on ignore Jake Malarkey and Paintmyhouse my guess is you're replying to one of them - Paintmyhouse you've prob. got on ignore already - Jake is only a half step ahead of him so far as intelligence goes - May I suggest don't waste your time ?

 

[JakeStarkey]

So you are highly concerned with subjective females. Says a lot about you.

Does it?

LOL! OK...

Pray tell, what does it say?

You couldn't take it.

So... Ya got nuttin'?

Color me SHOCKED!

I would most definitely color you yellow to match the streak down your back.

It takes a lot of courage to stand up to the Fag Militia -it doesn't take much to run with the perverted pack - which is basically all you're doing -

Greenbean is one of the curs in the perverted pack quirted into snarling retreat. We will do it every time they raise their collective head.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

stmike's been this, done that on the net, he is the real deal. So he says. No, he is not, and obviously no one can trust him. He is out only for himself.

Once again, stmike, you suffer no harm from marriage equality, none.

Oh, good. For a moment there I thought you forgot what we were discussing.

Senior moment.

Marriage equality existed before gay marriage. You can't prove discrimination where none existed.

I only have 2 people on ignore Jake Malarkey and Paintmyhouse my guess is you're replying to one of them - Paintmyhouse you've prob. got on ignore already - Jake is only a half step ahead of him so far as intelligence goes - May I suggest don't waste your time ?

Sage advice. He's going on ignore now.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Good, two have been quirted down.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

stmike's been this, done that on the net, he is the real deal. So he says. No, he is not, and obviously no one can trust him. He is out only for himself.

Once again, stmike, you suffer no harm from marriage equality, none.

Oh, good. For a moment there I thought you forgot what we were discussing.

Senior moment.

Marriage equality existed before gay marriage. You can't prove discrimination where none existed.

I only have 2 people on ignore Jake Malarkey and Paintmyhouse my guess is you're replying to one of them - Paintmyhouse you've prob. got on ignore already - Jake is only a half step ahead of him so far as intelligence goes - May I suggest don't waste your time ?

Sage advice. He's going on ignore now.

Real men don't use the ignore button you pussies, but then again, you aren't real men. Give me your addresses and I'll send you both a free box of tampons.

Those two are both bigger faggots than the ones they fear.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

stmike's been this, done that on the net, he is the real deal. So he says. No, he is not, and obviously no one can trust him. He is out only for himself.

Once again, stmike, you suffer no harm from marriage equality, none.

Oh, good. For a moment there I thought you forgot what we were discussing.

Senior moment.

Marriage equality existed before gay marriage. You can't prove discrimination where none existed.

I only have 2 people on ignore Jake Malarkey and Paintmyhouse my guess is you're replying to one of them - Paintmyhouse you've prob. got on ignore already - Jake is only a half step ahead of him so far as intelligence goes - May I suggest don't waste your time ?

LOL! I've got close to 40 on ignore... life is simply too short.

Jake is just a waste of skin; she is literally dumber than a bag of sand. Paintmyhouse is several notches up, with intelligence closer to that common to a dung beetle... rolling the same crap around, over and over. By comparison PMH is an off the scale genius.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I'm laughing because Left-think is the perspective of the irrationally subjective female, thus as with all comedy, it's funny, because it's true.

So you are highly concerned with subjective females. Says a lot about you.

Does it?

LOL! OK...

Pray tell, what does it say?

You couldn't take it.

So... Ya got nuttin'?

Color me SHOCKED!

I would most definitely color you yellow to match the streak down your back.

So, I've a yellow streak down my back?

Really?

Now, specifically, you're basing that on what?

 

[Cecilie1200]

stmike's been this, done that on the net, he is the real deal. So he says. No, he is not, and obviously no one can trust him. He is out only for himself.

Once again, stmike, you suffer no harm from marriage equality, none.

Oh, good. For a moment there I thought you forgot what we were discussing.

Senior moment.

Marriage equality existed before gay marriage. You can't prove discrimination where none existed.

I only have 2 people on ignore Jake Malarkey and Paintmyhouse my guess is you're replying to one of them - Paintmyhouse you've prob. got on ignore already - Jake is only a half step ahead of him so far as intelligence goes - May I suggest don't waste your time ?

LOL! I've got close to 40 on ignore... life is simply too short.

Jake is just a waste of skin; she is literally dumber than a bag of sand. Paintmyhouse is several notches up, with intelligence closer to that common to a dung beetle... rolling the same crap around, over and over. By comparison PMH is an off the scale genius.

Which just goes to show you how useless grading on a curve is.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

stmike's been this, done that on the net, he is the real deal. So he says. No, he is not, and obviously no one can trust him. He is out only for himself.

Once again, stmike, you suffer no harm from marriage equality, none.

Oh, good. For a moment there I thought you forgot what we were discussing.

Senior moment.

Marriage equality existed before gay marriage. You can't prove discrimination where none existed.

I only have 2 people on ignore Jake Malarkey and Paintmyhouse my guess is you're replying to one of them - Paintmyhouse you've prob. got on ignore already - Jake is only a half step ahead of him so far as intelligence goes - May I suggest don't waste your time ?

Sage advice. He's going on ignore now.

Real men don't use the ignore button you pussies, but then again, you aren't real men. Give me your addresses and I'll send you both a free box of tampons.

stmike's been this, done that on the net, he is the real deal. So he says. No, he is not, and obviously no one can trust him. He is out only for himself.

Once again, stmike, you suffer no harm from marriage equality, none.

Oh, good. For a moment there I thought you forgot what we were discussing.

Senior moment.

Marriage equality existed before gay marriage. You can't prove discrimination where none existed.

I only have 2 people on ignore Jake Malarkey and Paintmyhouse my guess is you're replying to one of them - Paintmyhouse you've prob. got on ignore already - Jake is only a half step ahead of him so far as intelligence goes - May I suggest don't waste your time ?

LOL! I've got close to 40 on ignore... life is simply too short.

For you, a case of tampons. What a pussy.

 

[Seawytch]

I am sorry, I just don't see homosexuals as a discreet group that NEEDS any more protections than are already guaranteed by the constitution to all of us, anyway. And YES, given that, people should be given leeway to accept or reject people on sexual preference, because choice transcends petty sexual matters, and THAT should be the capitol issue. In my humble opinion, anyway...

And I'm not sorry that gays and lesbians fighting for and attaining rights and protections equal to heterosexuals causes consternation to bigots and homophobes.

my wife had an aunt who was a lesbian, she outgrew it. what will happen to your "marriage" when you or you partner outgrow it?

I've been a lesbian for over 40 years and with my spouse for 20. I think we'll be okay. Your concern is touching.

 

[Seawytch]

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they can hardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

You're just providing an excellent example of why we don't vote on people's civil rights. Loving v Virginia was in 1967.

Calling it a "civil right" over and over again doesn't make it so...unless you're silly enough to believe that repetition has the power to turn a lie into truth.

And yet, oddly, court after court is agreeing with me and not you, aren't they?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Now we know quirting down the snarling and cowardlysocial con pack simply makes them put their betters on Ignore because they can't handle the correc tion

 

[Syriusly]

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they can hardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

You're just providing an excellent example of why we don't vote on people's civil rights. Loving v Virginia was in 1967.

no matter how many times you say it, race and sexual orientation are not the same.
.

Of course not- neither are race and religion or religion and gender.

But bigotry is all the same.

Whether it is bigotry based on race, or religion, or sexual orientation or on gender or on national origin.

All bigots- the only difference between them is the flavor of humans they want to stir up hatred towards.

 

[Syriusly]

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they can hardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

You're just providing an excellent example of why we don't vote on people's civil rights. Loving v Virginia was in 1967.

Calling it a "civil right" over and over again doesn't make it so...unless you're silly enough to believe that repetition has the power to turn a lie into truth.

Marriage is absolutely a right.

Claiming over and over again it is not- in the face of evidence that contradicts you is just idiotic.

 

[Syriusly]

You've made some ridiculous statements, but that's gotta be in the top 5.

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55

The key to that poll lies in its opening statement ...

support for the law recognizing same-sex marriages as legally valid

Which simply means they recognize the validity - had I myself been polled I would have polled in favor of its legal validity - that doesn't mean they recognize its sanity - in addition the article title ....

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%

cites a two year climb from 53 - 55% - anybody who knows anything about statistics and polling is well aware that 2% is statistically insignificant

In addition , even f it were significant - which it is not - any experiment or observation that involves drawing a sample from a population, there is always the possibility that an observed effect would have occurred due to sampling error alone

Actually- anyone who knows statistics knows that you can't claim that that 2% is insignificant without looking at the statistics involved.

Gallup tells us the statistical margin of erro
For results based on this sample of national
adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.

So roughly speaking that range would be between 51% and 59% approval.

People like yourself tend to ignore statistics they don't like, claim statistics say something that they don't and then crow about statistics that they do like.

Right now support for 'gay marriage' is roughly where support was for mixed race marriages in about 1996.

And we know how that trend has continued.

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they canhardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

When did Alabama voters decide it was time to eliminate Alabama law against mixed race marriages? 2002- and it won by a whopping 59% of the vote.....meaning 41% of Alabama voters didn't think the law should be repealed.

What you are upset about is that there is a sea change in attitudes towards homosexuals and marriage in the United States- and you are more and more in the position of the Alabama voters who still reject mixed race marriages.

In 2012, Washington voters voted 54% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maine voters voted 52% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maryland voters voted 52% to 48% to legalize same gender marriage.

What were the others results in 2012?
Minnsesota voters voted down a ban on gay marriages- 53% to 47%

North Carolina was the only state that was able to get a majority of voters to vote against gay marriage in 2012.

No one believes that Prop 8 would pass in California today, no matter how much money the LDS poured into the State.

The times they are a changing.

And those who oppose marriage equality for homosexual couples are being left behind like the couples that opposed marriage equality for mixed race couples.

Pathetic queer Imbeciles trying to steal the wind from the sails of Civil Rights - Hey faggot - Sexual Dementia and societal perversion are not a Civil Right - douche bag.

Pathetic bigot haters- the only difference between you and the guy waving a KKK sign is the flavor of human you choose to hate. I think I found a photo of you

Meanwhile

When did Alabama voters decide it was time to eliminate Alabama law against mixed race marriages? 2002- and it won by a whopping 59% of the vote.....meaning 41% of Alabama voters didn't think the law should be repealed.

What you are upset about is that there is a sea change in attitudes towards homosexuals and marriage in the United States- and you are more and more in the position of the Alabama voters who still reject mixed race marriages.

In 2012, Washington voters voted 54% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maine voters voted 52% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maryland voters voted 52% to 48% to legalize same gender marriage.

What were the others results in 2012?
Minnsesota voters voted down a ban on gay marriages- 53% to 47%

North Carolina was the only state that was able to get a majority of voters to vote against gay marriage in 2012.

No one believes that Prop 8 would pass in California today, no matter how much money the LDS poured into the State.

The times they are a changing.

And those who oppose marriage equality for homosexual couples are being left behind like the couples that opposed marriage equality for mixed race couples.

 

[GreenBean]

The key to that poll lies in its opening statement ...

Which simply means they recognize the validity - had I myself been polled I would have polled in favor of its legal validity - that doesn't mean they recognize its sanity - in addition the article title ....

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%

cites a two year climb from 53 - 55% - anybody who knows anything about statistics and polling is well aware that 2% is statistically insignificant

In addition , even f it were significant - which it is not - any experiment or observation that involves drawing a sample from a population, there is always the possibility that an observed effect would have occurred due to sampling error alone

Actually- anyone who knows statistics knows that you can't claim that that 2% is insignificant without looking at the statistics involved.

Gallup tells us the statistical margin of erro
For results based on this sample of national
adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.

So roughly speaking that range would be between 51% and 59% approval.

People like yourself tend to ignore statistics they don't like, claim statistics say something that they don't and then crow about statistics that they do like.

Right now support for 'gay marriage' is roughly where support was for mixed race marriages in about 1996.

And we know how that trend has continued.

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they canhardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

When did Alabama voters decide it was time to eliminate Alabama law against mixed race marriages? 2002- and it won by a whopping 59% of the vote.....meaning 41% of Alabama voters didn't think the law should be repealed.

What you are upset about is that there is a sea change in attitudes towards homosexuals and marriage in the United States- and you are more and more in the position of the Alabama voters who still reject mixed race marriages.

In 2012, Washington voters voted 54% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maine voters voted 52% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maryland voters voted 52% to 48% to legalize same gender marriage.

What were the others results in 2012?
Minnsesota voters voted down a ban on gay marriages- 53% to 47%

North Carolina was the only state that was able to get a majority of voters to vote against gay marriage in 2012.

No one believes that Prop 8 would pass in California today, no matter how much money the LDS poured into the State.

The times they are a changing.

And those who oppose marriage equality for homosexual couples are being left behind like the couples that opposed marriage equality for mixed race couples.

Pathetic queer Imbeciles trying to steal the wind from the sails of Civil Rights - Hey faggot - Sexual Dementia and societal perversion are not a Civil Right - douche bag.

Pathetic bigot haters- the only difference between you and the guy waving a KKK sign is the flavor of human you choose to hate. I think I found a photo of you

View attachment 35815

Meanwhile

When did Alabama voters decide it was time to eliminate Alabama law against mixed race marriages? 2002- and it won by a whopping 59% of the vote.....meaning 41% of Alabama voters didn't think the law should be repealed.

What you are upset about is that there is a sea change in attitudes towards homosexuals and marriage in the United States- and you are more and more in the position of the Alabama voters who still reject mixed race marriages.

In 2012, Washington voters voted 54% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maine voters voted 52% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maryland voters voted 52% to 48% to legalize same gender marriage.

What were the others results in 2012?
Minnsesota voters voted down a ban on gay marriages- 53% to 47%

North Carolina was the only state that was able to get a majority of voters to vote against gay marriage in 2012.

No one believes that Prop 8 would pass in California today, no matter how much money the LDS poured into the State.

The times they are a changing.

And those who oppose marriage equality for homosexual couples are being left behind like the couples that opposed marriage equality for mixed race couples.

 

[GreenBean]

The times they are a changing.

Just as predicted by the architects of the Gay Agenda
What they didn't account for was the backlash ... every wave starts with a ripple - can you feel the ripple ? Best hold onto your seat bitch - the tidal wave isn't far off.....

As predicted by Kirk and Madsen ...

Homosexual propaganda has been around for many years, the spark that ignited their present day stranglehold however was a After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's

**by Marshall Kirk, a researcher in neuropsychiatry and Hunter Madsen.

This powerfully persuasive, perverse and popular book within the gay community presents an impassioned plea, a call to arms if you will for homosexual activists to implement an aggressive, concerted and organized campaign to mold public perceptions. The book further lays out a blueprint, a methodology that has been rigidly implemented and enforced over the past 2 decades . Their rationalization for launching such a campaign is that people who do not agree with, or adhere to the Gay Agenda are "bigots, haters, or ignorants". The book further attempts to justify gay activists use of unscrupulous tactics , mass deceit, brainwashing, lying and malicious slander, blackmail, intimidation and violence. Kirk and Madsens book states the following ....

• "All sexual morality should be abolished" (pages 64 to 67)
  
  
• Homosexual agenda can succeed by "jamming" and "confusing" adversaries, so as to block or counteract the "rewarding of prejudice" (page 153);
  
  
• All opposing disagreements to homosexual behavior is rooted in "Homophobia, Homohatred, and Prejudice" (page 112)
  
  
• A media campaign should portray only the most favorable side of gays (page 170);
  
  
• Discourage anti-gay harassment by linking and calling all those that have opposing opinions to latent homosexuality (i.e., call people homophobic) (page 227)
  
  
• It is acceptable to call people "Homophobic" or "Haters" if they do not agree 100% with the gay agenda views, opinions, or behavior. (page 23)
  

Gay and Lesbian Media influences

 

[JakeStarkey]

"... every wave starts with a ripple - can you feel the ripple ? Best hold onto your seat bitch - the tidal wave isn't far off....."

Threat of violence? That's all you got. We will deal with you as we dealt with the Klan.

 

[GreenBean]

Marriage is absolutely a right.

Marriage is a RITE not a right - its also a privilege to be Right - one you will never enjoy - RIGHT ?