The Homosexual Dilemma

[Conservative65]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

 

[Redfish]

So we are the Biological Republic of the USA.

what the hell does that mean? Biology has always dictated how societies function. The roles of males and females are very clear in all species.

Boy do you need to learn biology. Start with male fishes who carry the eggs. And those other males who tend to them. Not to mention societies that used to be run by females.

Penguins where the male and female take equal turns on the nest or off getting food.

yes, they do. the roles of the sexes are instinctive to them. you don't see two female penguins sharing egg sitting and food gathering.

Um...yes you can.

proof?

 

[bodecea]

Only by faggots and you faggot lovers.

Seems there are more lovers than haters. You poor dear...

U.S. Acceptance of Gay Lesbian Relations Is the New Normal

You can't call accepting something abnormal normal based on numbers.

Right...we go by how you feel about it.

funny, you want our entire society to function based on the way you feeeeeeeeeeeel about it. You are a bigotted, confused idiot.

It's funny when people like Seawytch say such things then demand society function the way she wants when it comes to marriage.

Seawytch is demanding that society all have a gay marriage?

 

[Redfish]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

because they know that they are not in a majority. prop 8 in california proved that

 

[pillars]

but thats exactly what you want. you want a minority to dictate to the majority.

The 3 branches of government were established to prevent the tyranny of the majority over the minority. No one is forcing you to become gay, attend a gay wedding, condone or endorse gay marriage, or marry gay people. But, you don't get to determine what someone else's rights should be.

 

[bodecea]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

No problems now....but again.....you think civil rights should be up for a vote? How about we have a vote on the civil rights of....let's say.....Mormons. A vote, mind you.

Or how about a vote on the civil rights of obese people. A vote.

Or how about a vote on the civil rights of homeless people. A vote.

 

[Redfish]

Seems there are more lovers than haters. You poor dear...

U.S. Acceptance of Gay Lesbian Relations Is the New Normal

You can't call accepting something abnormal normal based on numbers.

Right...we go by how you feel about it.

funny, you want our entire society to function based on the way you feeeeeeeeeeeel about it. You are a bigotted, confused idiot.

It's funny when people like Seawytch say such things then demand society function the way she wants when it comes to marriage.

Seawytch is demanding that society all have a gay marriage?

she is demanding that society recognize gay marriage as normal. You cannot be as dumb as you seem.

 

[Conservative65]

Seems there are more lovers than haters. You poor dear...

U.S. Acceptance of Gay Lesbian Relations Is the New Normal

You can't call accepting something abnormal normal based on numbers.

Right...we go by how you feel about it.

funny, you want our entire society to function based on the way you feeeeeeeeeeeel about it. You are a bigotted, confused idiot.

It's funny when people like Seawytch say such things then demand society function the way she wants when it comes to marriage.

its called hypocrisy and she is very good at it.

Most lefties are. They live by the concept that it's OK for them to do something they say is wrong if done in a way they don't like. Use the marriage argument they put forth. Their claim is that two consenting adults that want to be married should be able to do so and no one should prevent it. At that point, although I don't personally believe it, pose a brother/sister marriage. They are quick to deny the equality they claim for same sex couples. They do toward those situations what they say is wrong to do for consenting adults. They try to justify it with hypocrisy by claiming there are compelling reasons in those cases. The hypocrisy they don't see is that they think they can determine what is compelling when they don't like it but in cases they support, no reason is compelling.

 

[Conservative65]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

No problems now....but again.....you think civil rights should be up for a vote? How about we have a vote on the civil rights of....let's say.....Mormons. A vote, mind you.

Or how about a vote on the civil rights of obese people. A vote.

Or how about a vote on the civil rights of homeless people. A vote.

The point I was making is they don't know if they are in a majority. If there claim was true, it's like having absolute knowledge that bet you can make is guaranteed to win yet not making the bet.

 

[bodecea]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

because they know that they are not in a majority. prop 8 in california proved that

Prop H8 would never win again. Prop 22 won by over 15%...Prop H8 barely won...and that's with money pouring in from Utah and congregations pouring out to street corners (with their children) on Sundays.

 

[Redfish]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

No problems now....but again.....you think civil rights should be up for a vote? How about we have a vote on the civil rights of....let's say.....Mormons. A vote, mind you.

Or how about a vote on the civil rights of obese people. A vote.

Or how about a vote on the civil rights of homeless people. A vote.

Those would require changing existing rights that were passed by majority votes. How exactly do you think the civil rights law became law? Did it just fall from the sky or was it voted on?

 

[bodecea]

You can't call accepting something abnormal normal based on numbers.

Right...we go by how you feel about it.

funny, you want our entire society to function based on the way you feeeeeeeeeeeel about it. You are a bigotted, confused idiot.

It's funny when people like Seawytch say such things then demand society function the way she wants when it comes to marriage.

its called hypocrisy and she is very good at it.

Most lefties are. They live by the concept that it's OK for them to do something they say is wrong if done in a way they don't like. Use the marriage argument they put forth. Their claim is that two consenting adults that want to be married should be able to do so and no one should prevent it. At that point, although I don't personally believe it, pose a brother/sister marriage. They are quick to deny the equality they claim for same sex couples. They do toward those situations what they say is wrong to do for consenting adults. They try to justify it with hypocrisy by claiming there are compelling reasons in those cases. The hypocrisy they don't see is that they think they can determine what is compelling when they don't like it but in cases they support, no reason is compelling.

Make your legal case for incest marriage. I don't plan to stand in your way.

 

[Conservative65]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

because they know that they are not in a majority. prop 8 in california proved that

Prop H8 would never win again. Prop 22 won by over 15%...Prop H8 barely won...and that's with money pouring in from Utah and congregations pouring out to street corners (with their children) on Sundays.

Dollar bills don't vote. It matters not how much money is spent unless the money can actually cast a vote.

 

[Redfish]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

because they know that they are not in a majority. prop 8 in california proved that

Prop H8 would never win again. Prop 22 won by over 15%...Prop H8 barely won...and that's with money pouring in from Utah and congregations pouring out to street corners (with their children) on Sundays.

so what is you objection to having a national referendum in every state on gay marriage?

 

[bodecea]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

No problems now....but again.....you think civil rights should be up for a vote? How about we have a vote on the civil rights of....let's say.....Mormons. A vote, mind you.

Or how about a vote on the civil rights of obese people. A vote.

Or how about a vote on the civil rights of homeless people. A vote.

Those would require changing existing rights that were passed by majority votes. How exactly do you think the civil rights law became law? Did it just fall from the sky or was it voted on?

So? You said it's all about majority rules. Now you move the goal posts?

I think it would be FUN to put a certain minority group of RWrs' civil rights up for a vote. After all....you think majority rules in everything.

 

[Conservative65]

Right...we go by how you feel about it.

funny, you want our entire society to function based on the way you feeeeeeeeeeeel about it. You are a bigotted, confused idiot.

It's funny when people like Seawytch say such things then demand society function the way she wants when it comes to marriage.

its called hypocrisy and she is very good at it.

Most lefties are. They live by the concept that it's OK for them to do something they say is wrong if done in a way they don't like. Use the marriage argument they put forth. Their claim is that two consenting adults that want to be married should be able to do so and no one should prevent it. At that point, although I don't personally believe it, pose a brother/sister marriage. They are quick to deny the equality they claim for same sex couples. They do toward those situations what they say is wrong to do for consenting adults. They try to justify it with hypocrisy by claiming there are compelling reasons in those cases. The hypocrisy they don't see is that they think they can determine what is compelling when they don't like it but in cases they support, no reason is compelling.

Make your legal case for incest marriage. I don't plan to stand in your way.

I said I didn't support it personally. What I support is those who say two consenting adults should be able to get married apply that concept to those they don't like as they demand those who oppose same sex marriage do. If the same sex supporters legal claim is equal protection and that two consenting adults should be able to get married, they've provided the legal argument they immediately oppose when a type of marriage they don't like is suggested.

 

[bodecea]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

because they know that they are not in a majority. prop 8 in california proved that

Prop H8 would never win again. Prop 22 won by over 15%...Prop H8 barely won...and that's with money pouring in from Utah and congregations pouring out to street corners (with their children) on Sundays.

so what is you objection to having a national referendum in every state on gay marriage?

Because civil rights aren't up for majority vote....that's YOUR side of the issue.

(Do you think inter-racial marriage would win if it was up for a vote?)

 

[Conservative65]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

because they know that they are not in a majority. prop 8 in california proved that

Prop H8 would never win again. Prop 22 won by over 15%...Prop H8 barely won...and that's with money pouring in from Utah and congregations pouring out to street corners (with their children) on Sundays.

so what is you objection to having a national referendum in every state on gay marriage?

That objection proves to me their claim of having majority support nationwide is wrong.

 

[Conservative65]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

because they know that they are not in a majority. prop 8 in california proved that

Prop H8 would never win again. Prop 22 won by over 15%...Prop H8 barely won...and that's with money pouring in from Utah and congregations pouring out to street corners (with their children) on Sundays.

so what is you objection to having a national referendum in every state on gay marriage?

Because civil rights aren't up for majority vote....that's YOUR side of the issue.

(Do you think inter-racial marriage would win if it was up for a vote?)

According to those like PaintMyHouse, since rights are granted by society, society can limit them when necessary. Which one is it.

 

[Redfish]

Look, from this thread it is very clear that there is a wide difference of opinion on gay marriage, homosexuality in general, and whether it is a normal or abnormal human condition.

When societies face such differences they vote and the majority opinion is accepted, or dealt with, by all.

So, lets let america vote on whether the nation should sanction gay unions as marriages, allow them but call them something else, or ban them totally.

let the people speak.

whether you comprehend it or not, all of our rights in this country were originally established by majority vote. We may say they were "God-given" but we made them valid by majority vote.

Lets do the same on the gay issues and put the issue to bed (poor choice of words) for a while.

The same sex marriage supporters claim a majority of the people in the country support it. If that is true, why would they be opposed to having a vote. If they hold the majority they claim, wouldn't that guarantee a win for them.

No problems now....but again.....you think civil rights should be up for a vote? How about we have a vote on the civil rights of....let's say.....Mormons. A vote, mind you.

Or how about a vote on the civil rights of obese people. A vote.

Or how about a vote on the civil rights of homeless people. A vote.

Those would require changing existing rights that were passed by majority votes. How exactly do you think the civil rights law became law? Did it just fall from the sky or was it voted on?

So? You said it's all about majority rules. Now you move the goal posts?

I think it would be FUN to put a certain minority group of RWrs' civil rights up for a vote. After all....you think majority rules in everything.

in a democracy majority does rule in everything. you confuse minority votes with minority views, races, etc.

the rights of minorities were established by the majority. Do you know anything about how this country works?