The Homosexual Dilemma

[Lilah]

I suspect the reason why homosexuals, in the past, hid in the closet was because of a hateful, raging, smug, intolerant, closed-minded, despicable bigot like you.

Bigot?

Me?

Let's test that...

Bigotry: intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.

Huh... That's weird. You called ME a bigot, even as YOU WERE DEMONSTRATING THE PRECISE COMPOSITION of "Bigotry".

LOL! ... who could've seen THAT comin'?

You feed off of marginalizing people...

Wait... is it me, or is that YOU, trying to marginalize ME?

I only ask because it really looks like YOU'RE TRYING TO MARGINALIZE ME... and ya seem to be doing so, even as ya imply that doin' so, is wrong.

So you seem to be suffering some sort of cognitive dissonance. And ya might want to get that checked out. Could be a serious problem for ya.

trying to make them feel inferior as if they don't belong in your world.

But... You're trying to make me feel inferior, and clearly your premise, is that I don't belong in your world.

I mean... this is you, right? >>

But I've news for you, it's not your world and your wicked, evil ways are no longer valid in the 21st Century. Shame on you!

All I'm doing is stating a fact: Homosexuality deviates from the physiological standard established by the natural, intrinsic design of the human being. And that it not only deviates from that standard, it deviates as FAR OFF THE STANDARD AS CAN BE PRODUCED, WHERE THE SUBJECTS IN CONSIDERATION REMAIN HUMAN.

Meaning that it's not possible to deviate FURTHER FROM THE HUMAN SEXUALITY NORM, THAN HOMOSEXUALITY.

With the overriding point being that it's beyond foolish to claim that THAT DEVIATION is normal.

Because... it's not normal. It's demonstrably abnormal... and nothing short of a presentation of a profound mental disorder... (cognitive dissonance, for instance.)

Which, again... is why homosexuals have spent the bulk of human existence up on the top shelf, pushed toward the back of the closet. "It's a problem..."

Please stop cutting and pasting long enough to learn the meaning of cognitive dissonance. I've been consistent in espousing my viewpoint that all people deserve to be treated justly and humanely.
It's quite obvious that your negative teachings have manifested themselves into disdain and contempt for minorities ... particularly gay people, whom you knowingly and willingly look down upon as being second-class citizens. You have made them your targeted group in order to try and exalt yourself as being morally superior by ascribing particular vices to them, including sexual degeneracy, especially against children.
Your hate speech, tainted slurs and bullying perpetrates violent outbreaks against the LGBT community.
Your despicable teachings of hatred are, in my view, being discredited and abandoned by those of us who choose not to stigmatize and demonize gays and lesbians. Gay people exist. It is wrong to call them names or use slurs about them. Their relationships should not be criminalized. They should not be discriminated against in employment, housing, and public accommodation. They should not be bullied. They should never have to be afraid of violence as they go about their daily lives. They should not be blamed for America’s security problems or social ills. They should not be stigmatized or treated with contempt. There should be no space in church life or culture for their dehumanization and mistreatment.
Your teachings and behavior place gays and lesbians at greater risk of losing their self-worth, health and well being. What is your reward for such vile behavior?

 

[Redfish]

Because no gender is being told they can't marry.

They are being told which gender they cannot marry. That is gender discrimination.

No different than being told what race you have to marry.

Your argument is as stupid as when interracial marriages were illegal and some bigoted idiot (redundant phrase) like you would say, "No race is being told they can't marry."

a union of two men or two women is NOT a marriage.

Yes, it is. Sorry about that!

They should be able to legally commit to each other and have that union recognized, but it is NOT a marriage.

Your stupid little semantics game is transparent.

If you folks down at Westboro Baptist don't want to call a gay marriage a marriage, that's your right. But you don't get to force them not to call their marriage a marriage.

As for having their union recognized, that won't be true until they receive the exact same state and federal government cash and prizes we heteros get for being married.

That's all they want. You can stomp your feet and blow a lot of retard smoke about the word "marriage", but until you get it through your thick skull that that is all they want then you will continue to sound like a retard.

Now focus: Government cash and prizes. They want the same. "Equal protection of the laws."

Get that through your head. It isn't about a word, idiot. It is about tangible things. Real world shit that actually matters. Legal stuff.

a gay civil union would give them exactly the same govt cash and prizes as a man/woman marriage.

IT IS ALL ABOUT THE WORD, DEAL WITH THAT REALITY.

 

[Lilah]

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.

The Ideological Left does not contest incest marriage, nor do they contest polygamy, or bestiality... And they don't care about it, because they're idiots without the slightest means to reason through the equation and recognize the immorality of such and the destructive nature of immorality... and they do so, because they can't stand the idea that someone else should tell them how to act.

The Left wants to be free, without bearing ANY of the responsibilities that are intrinsic to such.

FTR: That's OKA: Evil...

Take note, apathetic dimwit, this country has evolved immensely. Why are you so afraid of people?
If you really want to discuss hypocrisy, take a look at the Eugenics Movement headed by old Republican men. States allowed social workers to designate people for sterilization. The standards by which individuals could be forcibly sterilized were the most lax in the nation: unmarried women with children, African Americans, individuals with I.Q.'s under 70, the mentally ill, and children from poor families. Does the majority really rule?

Do you have a link for that or are you just pulling stuff out of your cock dilated ass? The only eugenic proponent I know of is Margaret Sanger who opened abortion clinics to kill off black people. One of yours, of course.

At least you've admitted you don't very much, which proves most bigots are uneducated. Slide your fingers over your keyboard and locate the letters GOOGLE. You do know how to Google, don't you?

When you make outlandish claims, it's up to you to prove them. Short of that, we can just assume you made it up.

Maybe your education is predicated upon such a premise, but my education was predicated upon my own personal responsibility to seek knowledge for myself and in doing so, accept personal responsibility for my choices and actions.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Because no gender is being told they can't marry.

They are being told which gender they cannot marry. That is gender discrimination.

No different than being told what race you have to marry.

Your argument is as stupid as when interracial marriages were illegal and some bigoted idiot (redundant phrase) like you would say, "No race is being told they can't marry."

a union of two men or two women is NOT a marriage.

Yes, it is. Sorry about that!

They should be able to legally commit to each other and have that union recognized, but it is NOT a marriage.

Your stupid little semantics game is transparent.

If you folks down at Westboro Baptist don't want to call a gay marriage a marriage, that's your right. But you don't get to force them not to call their marriage a marriage.

As for having their union recognized, that won't be true until they receive the exact same state and federal government cash and prizes we heteros get for being married.

That's all they want. You can stomp your feet and blow a lot of retard smoke about the word "marriage", but until you get it through your thick skull that that is all they want then you will continue to sound like a retard.

Now focus: Government cash and prizes. They want the same. "Equal protection of the laws."

Get that through your head. It isn't about a word, idiot. It is about tangible things. Real world shit that actually matters. Legal stuff.

a gay civil union would give them exactly the same govt cash and prizes as a man/woman marriage.

IT IS ALL ABOUT THE WORD, DEAL WITH THAT REALITY.

So you're hung up on a word, when worlds change over time? What a dumbass you are.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The Ideological Left does not contest incest marriage, nor do they contest polygamy, or bestiality... And they don't care about it, because they're idiots without the slightest means to reason through the equation and recognize the immorality of such and the destructive nature of immorality... and they do so, because they can't stand the idea that someone else should tell them how to act.

The Left wants to be free, without bearing ANY of the responsibilities that are intrinsic to such.

FTR: That's OKA: Evil...

Take note, apathetic dimwit, this country has evolved immensely. Why are you so afraid of people?
If you really want to discuss hypocrisy, take a look at the Eugenics Movement headed by old Republican men. States allowed social workers to designate people for sterilization. The standards by which individuals could be forcibly sterilized were the most lax in the nation: unmarried women with children, African Americans, individuals with I.Q.'s under 70, the mentally ill, and children from poor families. Does the majority really rule?

Do you have a link for that or are you just pulling stuff out of your cock dilated ass? The only eugenic proponent I know of is Margaret Sanger who opened abortion clinics to kill off black people. One of yours, of course.

At least you've admitted you don't very much, which proves most bigots are uneducated. Slide your fingers over your keyboard and locate the letters GOOGLE. You do know how to Google, don't you?

When you make outlandish claims, it's up to you to prove them. Short of that, we can just assume you made it up.

Maybe your education is predicated upon such a premise, but my education was predicated upon my own personal responsibility to seek knowledge for myself and in doing so, accept personal responsibility for my choices and actions.

Then you made it up. I'm not obligated to chase after every stupid claim you can dream up. Nobody is.

If you can't make your arguments without making things up, then I thank you not to make them at all.

 

[Syriusly]

1, stmike is not the face of Christianity or its doctrines.

2. the anti-gay movement continues to lose traction.

there is no anti-gay "movement". GRow the fuck up.

Of course there is an 'anti-gay movement'- it gets smaller and smaller each year but they are out there trying to stir up fears about homosexuals

The Million Mom's organization regularly attempts boycotts on business's because they are deemed to 'gay friendly'
Hotwire s Lucky Me Ad Featuring Two Gay Dads Slammed By One Million Moms

Best known for its failed boycott of JCPenney after the retail chain hired Ellen DeGeneres as its spokesperson, One Million Moms is now crying foul over a Hotwire's "Lucky Me" commercial, which features two gay dads.

Then there is the 'Family Research Council' and of course there are others

• List of anti-LGBT groups
  • 4.1 Abiding Truth Ministries
  • 4.2 American Family Association
  • 4.3 American Vision
  • 4.4 Americans for Truth About Homosexuality
  • 4.5 Bethesda Christian Institute
  • 4.6 Chalcedon Foundation
  • 4.7 Dove World Outreach Center
  • 4.8 Faithful Word Baptist Church
  • 4.9 Family Research Council
  • 4.10 Family Research Institute
  • 4.11 Heterosexuals Organized for a Moral Environment
  • 4.12 Illinois Family Institute
  • 4.13 Jewish Political Action Committee
  • 4.14 MassResistance
  • 4.15 Mission: America
  • 4.16 Parents Action League
  • 4.17 Public Advocate of the United States
  • 4.18 SaveCalifornia.com
  • 4.19 Sons of Thundr (Faith Baptist Church)
  • 4.20 Tom Brown Ministries
  • 4.21 Traditional Values Coalition
  • 4.22 True Light Pentecost Church
  • 4.23 United Families International
  • 4.24 Westboro Baptist Church
  • 4.25 Windsor Hills Baptist Church
  • 4.26 World Congress of Families
  • 4.27 You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International

 

[g5000]

Because no gender is being told they can't marry.

They are being told which gender they cannot marry. That is gender discrimination.

No different than being told what race you have to marry.

Your argument is as stupid as when interracial marriages were illegal and some bigoted idiot (redundant phrase) like you would say, "No race is being told they can't marry."

a union of two men or two women is NOT a marriage.

Yes, it is. Sorry about that!

They should be able to legally commit to each other and have that union recognized, but it is NOT a marriage.

Your stupid little semantics game is transparent.

If you folks down at Westboro Baptist don't want to call a gay marriage a marriage, that's your right. But you don't get to force them not to call their marriage a marriage.

As for having their union recognized, that won't be true until they receive the exact same state and federal government cash and prizes we heteros get for being married.

That's all they want. You can stomp your feet and blow a lot of retard smoke about the word "marriage", but until you get it through your thick skull that that is all they want then you will continue to sound like a retard.

Now focus: Government cash and prizes. They want the same. "Equal protection of the laws."

Get that through your head. It isn't about a word, idiot. It is about tangible things. Real world shit that actually matters. Legal stuff.

a gay civil union would give them exactly the same govt cash and prizes as a man/woman marriage.

And yet they are denied that to this day. Which is why the struggle continues, dipshit. It isn't over. They do not have the same protections to this day.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Because no gender is being told they can't marry.

They are being told which gender they cannot marry. That is gender discrimination.

No different than being told what race you have to marry.

Your argument is as stupid as when interracial marriages were illegal and some bigoted idiot (redundant phrase) like you would say, "No race is being told they can't marry."

What's stupid is your knee jerk dumbing down understanding of Loving V Virginia. The decision wasn't based on people not being able to marry another race, it was based on the law being applied unequally, utilizing racial discrimination:

"There is patently no legitimate overriding purpose independent of invidious racial discrimination which justifies this classification. The fact that Virginia prohibits only interracial marriages involving white persons demonstrates that the racial classifications must stand on their own justification, as measures designed to maintain White Supremacy".

This is why it doesn't compare to marriage laws that don't discriminate and are applied equally to all people. Now you know.

Or not.

 

[Syriusly]

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?

We don't have national referendum's. Not even every states has referendum process's- only 27 do.

I am fine with referendum's- feel free to put them on the ballot- but frankly the issue will have been decided before any new initiatives make it on the ballot.

And any initiatives still have to survive constitutional challenges- whether they are in regards to marriage or guns.

IF the Supreme Court does rule in favor of marriage equality, then looking at Loving v. Virginia as an example, over the next 30 years states will gradually repeal the laws deemed unconstitutional.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Because no gender is being told they can't marry.

They are being told which gender they cannot marry. That is gender discrimination.

No different than being told what race you have to marry.

Your argument is as stupid as when interracial marriages were illegal and some bigoted idiot (redundant phrase) like you would say, "No race is being told they can't marry."

What's stupid is your knee jerk dumbing down understanding of Loving V Virginia. The decision wasn't based on people not being able to marry another race, it was based on the law being applied unequally, utilizing racial discrimination:

"There is patently no legitimate overriding purpose independent of invidious racial discrimination which justifies this classification. The fact that Virginia prohibits only interracial marriages involving white persons demonstrates that the racial classifications must stand on their own justification, as measures designed to maintain White Supremacy".

This is why it doesn't compare to marriage laws that don't discriminate and are applied equally to all people. Now you know.

Or not.

Hey dummy, not all people want to marry the opposite sex so now what?

 

[g5000]

The only eugenic proponent I know of is Margaret Sanger who opened abortion clinics to kill off black people.

A completely bogus claim.

 

[bodecea]

Because no gender is being told they can't marry.

They are being told which gender they cannot marry. That is gender discrimination.

No different than being told what race you have to marry.

Your argument is as stupid as when interracial marriages were illegal and some bigoted idiot (redundant phrase) like you would say, "No race is being told they can't marry."

They also used religion as an excuse to make inter-racial marriages illegal.

race and sex are not analogous

So....if we have equal civil rights in this country regardless of race......we DON'T have the same civil rights in this country based on gender? IS that what you are saying?

 

[GreenBean]

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.

Nope. You faggots are just forcing people to conduct the ceremonies, bake wedding cakes, and offer photography services for fag weddings. I love how how you turd pirates pretend like you're not in everyone's face and not forcing your beliefs on anyone. Bull fcking shit!

Have you abandoned all pretext of being a Christian?

Did you know that Public Accommodation laws protect Christians in all 50 states but gays in only a handful? Gays must serve Christians in all 50 states, but Christians don't have to serve gays in all 50. You aren't really going to try to pretend that the law treats Christians unfairly are you?

Gays are protected as Christians, Jews, Atheists, Blacks, Whites , Chicanos or whatever category they happen tofall into. Degenerate is not one of those categories

 

[g5000]

Because no gender is being told they can't marry.

They are being told which gender they cannot marry. That is gender discrimination.

No different than being told what race you have to marry.

Your argument is as stupid as when interracial marriages were illegal and some bigoted idiot (redundant phrase) like you would say, "No race is being told they can't marry."

What's stupid is your knee jerk dumbing down understanding of Loving V Virginia. The decision wasn't based on people not being able to marry another race, it was based on the law being applied unequally, utilizing racial discrimination:

"There is patently no legitimate overriding purpose independent of invidious racial discrimination which justifies this classification. The fact that Virginia prohibits only interracial marriages involving white persons demonstrates that the racial classifications must stand on their own justification, as measures designed to maintain White Supremacy".

This is why it doesn't compare to marriage laws that don't discriminate and are applied equally to all people. Now you know.

Or not.

You have a serious reading comprehension problem. What Loving v Virginia was plainly stating was the law had to have a rational basis for excluding certain groups from marrying.

None of you bigots have ever provided a rational basis for excluding gay marriage from equal protection of the laws, and I can guarantee you the Supreme Court is going to say the same thing when it finally makes a decision.

 

[bodecea]

Because no gender is being told they can't marry.

They are being told which gender they cannot marry. That is gender discrimination.

No different than being told what race you have to marry.

Your argument is as stupid as when interracial marriages were illegal and some bigoted idiot (redundant phrase) like you would say, "No race is being told they can't marry."

a union of two men or two women is NOT a marriage. They should be able to legally commit to each other and have that union recognized, but it is NOT a marriage.

why is the word "marriage" so critical to the gay agenda? A civil union gives you all of the rights you claim to want.

But thats not what this is about is it? the gay agenda is about forced societal acceptance of homosexuality as a normal human condition. Thats your real agenda, admit it and then we can move forward.

But you won't admit it, because you know that homosexuality is not a normal human condition

That is your opinion.

 

[g5000]

Gays are protected as Christians, Jews, Atheists, Blacks, Whites , Chicanos or whatever category they happen tofall into. Degenerate is not one of those categories

"I think gays are icky" is not a rational basis for excluding them from the government cash and prizes given to married people.

 

[GreenBean]

Because no gender is being told they can't marry.

They are being told which gender they cannot marry. That is gender discrimination.

No different than being told what race you have to marry.

Your argument is as stupid as when interracial marriages were illegal and some bigoted idiot (redundant phrase) like you would say, "No race is being told they can't marry."

They also used religion as an excuse to make inter-racial marriages illegal.

race and sex are not analogous

So....if we have equal civil rights in this country regardless of race......we DON'T have the same civil rights in this country based on gender? IS that what you are saying?

Gender

There are only two correct answers - Male and Female -

Undecided -
Both of the Above
None of the Above
are not options on this multiple choice quiz.

 

[Lilah]

Take note, apathetic dimwit, this country has evolved immensely. Why are you so afraid of people?
If you really want to discuss hypocrisy, take a look at the Eugenics Movement headed by old Republican men. States allowed social workers to designate people for sterilization. The standards by which individuals could be forcibly sterilized were the most lax in the nation: unmarried women with children, African Americans, individuals with I.Q.'s under 70, the mentally ill, and children from poor families. Does the majority really rule?

Do you have a link for that or are you just pulling stuff out of your cock dilated ass? The only eugenic proponent I know of is Margaret Sanger who opened abortion clinics to kill off black people. One of yours, of course.

At least you've admitted you don't very much, which proves most bigots are uneducated. Slide your fingers over your keyboard and locate the letters GOOGLE. You do know how to Google, don't you?

When you make outlandish claims, it's up to you to prove them. Short of that, we can just assume you made it up.

Maybe your education is predicated upon such a premise, but my education was predicated upon my own personal responsibility to seek knowledge for myself and in doing so, accept personal responsibility for my choices and actions.

Then you made it up. I'm not obligated to chase after every stupid claim you can dream up. Nobody is.

If you can't make your arguments without making things up, then I thank you not to make them at all.

Try to use what little common sense you may possess. I'm not the author of American history, and if you are too lazy to read it, then it you're problem.

 

[g5000]

Because no gender is being told they can't marry.

They are being told which gender they cannot marry. That is gender discrimination.

No different than being told what race you have to marry.

Your argument is as stupid as when interracial marriages were illegal and some bigoted idiot (redundant phrase) like you would say, "No race is being told they can't marry."

They also used religion as an excuse to make inter-racial marriages illegal.

race and sex are not analogous

So....if we have equal civil rights in this country regardless of race......we DON'T have the same civil rights in this country based on gender? IS that what you are saying?

Gender

There are only two correct answers - Male and Female -

Undecided -
Both of the Above
None of the Above
are not options on this multiple choice quiz.

If you tell a white person they can only marry another white person, you are discriminating based on race.

If you tell a female person they can only marry a male person, you are discriminating based on gender.

There is no rational basis for either.

 

[GreenBean]

Gays are protected as Christians, Jews, Atheists, Blacks, Whites , Chicanos or whatever category they happen tofall into. Degenerate is not one of those categories

"I think gays are icky" is not a rational basis for excluding them from the government cash and prizes given to married people.

Follow the thread dumbass - the subject replied to was Public Accommodation laws - not Gay Marriage -

FYI , I am not against Gay Marriage - I think its pretty "Icky" but its a perverts right to be as degenerate as he/she wants in the privacy of their own homes .