The Left Loses Ground...

[Hutch Starskey]

[Q

It has only been "debunked" by those whose grandchildren will be ashamed of them in coming years.

ROFLMNAO...

Reader, what the cultist is trying not to tell you, is that it believes that behavior: sexual deviancy equates to 'being black'.

Or the idea that " sexual deviency" equates to being gay.

See how that works?

 

[The Rabbi]

[Q

It has only been "debunked" by those whose grandchildren will be ashamed of them in coming years.

ROFLMNAO...

Reader, what the cultist is trying not to tell you, is that it believes that behavior: sexual deviancy equates to 'being black'.

Or the idea that " sexual deviency" equates to being gay.

See how that works?

Homosexuality is sexual deviancy. Why would you think it isnt?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Substitute gay for interracial and it's exactly the same argument. If the argument against lost then, then it must also lose now.

Well sure... EXCEPT THAT THE FORMER IS RELEVANT TO GENETIC ISSUES WHICH PRECLUDE THE MINORITY FROM ALTERING THE ASPECT OF THEIR PERSON WHICH WOULD QUALIFY THEM TO MARRY WHITE WOMEN... And the Latter, homosexuality has NO GENETIC COMPONENT... And is therefore relevant SOLELY TO BEHAVIOR... Which any one of those drifting themselves as such can alter at anytime and usually DO.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Americans disagree with you, Pubes.

You lost.

Wrong. Gay marriage was an overwhelming loser at the polls. That's why the homos took to the courts.

Just like Segregation.

You're on the wrong side of history.

The "gays aer really Negroes c.1960" argument has already been debunked. There is no "right side of history."

Substitute gay for interracial and it's exactly the same argument. If the argument against lost then, then it must also lose now.

The argument that gays are Negroes c.1960 is a loser of an argument. But it is one of only two arguments the pro fags have.

A loser argument for you.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

[Q

It has only been "debunked" by those whose grandchildren will be ashamed of them in coming years.

ROFLMNAO...

Reader, what the cultist is trying not to tell you, is that it believes that behavior: sexual deviancy equates to 'being black'.

Or the idea that " sexual deviency" equates to being gay.

See how that works?

Homosexuality is sexual deviancy. Why would you think it isnt?

Because it would be stupid to assume that the only motivation for homosexuality is sexual. Is that your sole motivation with heterosexuality?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Substitute gay for interracial and it's exactly the same argument. If the argument against lost then, then it must also lose now.

Well sure... EXCEPT THAT THE FORMER IS RELEVANT TO GENETIC ISSUES WHICH PRECLUDE THE MINORITY FROM ALTERING THE ASPECT OF THEIR PERSON WHICH WOULD QUALIFY THEM TO MARRY WHITE WOMEN... And the Latter, homosexuality has NO GENETIC COMPONENT... And is therefore relevant SOLELY TO BEHAVIOR... Which any one of those drifting themselves as such can alter at anytime and usually DO.

It's not about genetics, nature or nurture or any other ridiculous arguments you make, it's about equality. The same "unnatural" argument was made agaist interracial marriage as well. It lost .

 

[The Rabbi]

[Q

It has only been "debunked" by those whose grandchildren will be ashamed of them in coming years.

ROFLMNAO...

Reader, what the cultist is trying not to tell you, is that it believes that behavior: sexual deviancy equates to 'being black'.

Or the idea that " sexual deviency" equates to being gay.

See how that works?

Homosexuality is sexual deviancy. Why would you think it isnt?

Because it would be stupid to assume that the only motivation for homosexuality is sexual. Is that your sole motivation with heterosexuality?

WTF?
Homosexuality by definition involves sexual preference. What other motivation could there be?
Geezus you dont think about what you post before you do it, do you?

 

[The Rabbi]

Substitute gay for interracial and it's exactly the same argument. If the argument against lost then, then it must also lose now.

Well sure... EXCEPT THAT THE FORMER IS RELEVANT TO GENETIC ISSUES WHICH PRECLUDE THE MINORITY FROM ALTERING THE ASPECT OF THEIR PERSON WHICH WOULD QUALIFY THEM TO MARRY WHITE WOMEN... And the Latter, homosexuality has NO GENETIC COMPONENT... And is therefore relevant SOLELY TO BEHAVIOR... Which any one of those drifting themselves as such can alter at anytime and usually DO.

It's not about genetics, nature or nurture or any other ridiculous arguments you make, it's about equality. The same "unnatural" argument was made agaist interracial marriage as well. It lost .

Homosexuals have exactly the same rights as heterosexuals. So it is not about equality.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Substitute gay for interracial and it's exactly the same argument. If the argument against lost then, then it must also lose now.

Well sure... EXCEPT THAT THE FORMER IS RELEVANT TO GENETIC ISSUES WHICH PRECLUDE THE MINORITY FROM ALTERING THE ASPECT OF THEIR PERSON WHICH WOULD QUALIFY THEM TO MARRY WHITE WOMEN... And the Latter, homosexuality has NO GENETIC COMPONENT... And is therefore relevant SOLELY TO BEHAVIOR... Which any one of those drifting themselves as such can alter at anytime and usually DO.

It's not about genetics, nature or nurture or any other ridiculous arguments you make, it's about equality. The same "unnatural" argument was made agaist interracial marriage as well. It lost .

Homosexuals have exactly the same rights as heterosexuals. So it is not about equality.

"exactly the same rights" ?

Then WTF are you arguing about?

Too funny.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

[Q

It has only been "debunked" by those whose grandchildren will be ashamed of them in coming years.

ROFLMNAO...

Reader, what the cultist is trying not to tell you, is that it believes that behavior: sexual deviancy equates to 'being black'.

Or the idea that " sexual deviency" equates to being gay.

See how that works?

Homosexuality is sexual deviancy. Why would you think it isnt?

Because it would be stupid to assume that the only motivation for homosexuality is sexual. Is that your sole motivation with heterosexuality?

WTF?
Homosexuality by definition involves sexual preference. What other motivation could there be?
Geezus you dont think about what you post before you do it, do you?

Sexual preference. Not sexual "deviency".

 

[The Rabbi]

Substitute gay for interracial and it's exactly the same argument. If the argument against lost then, then it must also lose now.

Well sure... EXCEPT THAT THE FORMER IS RELEVANT TO GENETIC ISSUES WHICH PRECLUDE THE MINORITY FROM ALTERING THE ASPECT OF THEIR PERSON WHICH WOULD QUALIFY THEM TO MARRY WHITE WOMEN... And the Latter, homosexuality has NO GENETIC COMPONENT... And is therefore relevant SOLELY TO BEHAVIOR... Which any one of those drifting themselves as such can alter at anytime and usually DO.

It's not about genetics, nature or nurture or any other ridiculous arguments you make, it's about equality. The same "unnatural" argument was made agaist interracial marriage as well. It lost .

Homosexuals have exactly the same rights as heterosexuals. So it is not about equality.

"exactly the same rights" ?

Then WTF are you arguing about?

Too funny.

Im not the one arguing this is an issue of right, Leroy. That would be you.

 

[The Rabbi]

ROFLMNAO...

Reader, what the cultist is trying not to tell you, is that it believes that behavior: sexual deviancy equates to 'being black'.

Or the idea that " sexual deviency" equates to being gay.

See how that works?

Homosexuality is sexual deviancy. Why would you think it isnt?

Because it would be stupid to assume that the only motivation for homosexuality is sexual. Is that your sole motivation with heterosexuality?

WTF?
Homosexuality by definition involves sexual preference. What other motivation could there be?
Geezus you dont think about what you post before you do it, do you?

Sexual preference. Not sexual "deviency".

So at least you realize that homosexuality is sexual in nature. Thats some kind of advance.
Homsexuals' sexual preference represents a sexual deviency. Just as people into BDSM represent sexual deviency.

 

[candycorn]

C'mon...call her the name...let your inner republican show through.

She's not too bright,neither are you

She's rich, successful and apparently has a happy life. You're arguing with a stranger on the Internet. Advantage Fluke.

say the word...you know you want to call her that....

Do you have the hots for her?..she's a leftist tool

You brought up Ms. Fluke....it would seem you are the one with "the hots" for her

Yeah i think i can turn her

Into a loser like yourself perhaps.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

It's not about genetics, nature or nurture or any other ridiculous arguments you make, it's about equality. The same "unnatural" argument was made agaist interracial marriage as well. It lost .

I agree... It's all about equality.

The problem is that you and you cult of idiocy are trying to equate RACE, with BEHAVIOR... And there is no potential equity between dissimilar concepts.

For instance, steel is not equal to yellow.

But hey, in fairness to you, as an imbecile, there is no way you could have known that.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's not about genetics, nature or nurture or any other ridiculous arguments you make, it's about equality. The same "unnatural" argument was made agaist interracial marriage as well. It lost .

I agree... It's all about equality.

The problem is that you and you cult of idiocy are trying to equate RACE, with BEHAVIOR... And there is no potential equity between dissimilar concepts.

For instance, steel is not equal to yellow.

But hey, in fairness to you, as an imbecile, there is no way you could have known that.

They harp on it because it is the only argument they have. Otherwise there is no reason whatsoever to have "same sex marriage." In fact there is every reason not to. Once marriage can mean anything then it means nothing.

 

[bripat9643]

And I know you've lost because you are putting words un my mouth, dum-dum.
Stick to the topic. You are simply wrong. And look stupid doing it.

I'll use your own words then:

"Judicial review is not part of the constittuion and is a power the Court dreamed up in Marbury."

Happy now? Need a link to you saying that?

lol

Are you disputing that fact? Please show me where judicial review is mentioned in the COnstitution? I want to see you double down on stupid.

Don't ask me questions until you've answered mine.

And while you're at it, prove that all the judges who upheld same sex marriage were homosexuals.

I'll wait.

"California Same-Sex Marriage Ruling Upheld: Court Won't Overturn Prop 8 Decision Because Judge Was Gay"
California Same-Sex Marriage Ruling Upheld Court Won t Overturn Prop 8 Decision Because Judge Was Gay

His decision was upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7, 2012.

There have been over two score rulings all over the country by justices appointed by Republicans and Democrats. What's the current "score"? Fifty plus rulings in favor of same sex couples having full and equal access to civil marriage and like one or two that said "nah, gays are icky"?

Huh. There's a reason they call that court the "9th Circus." It's populated with leftwing hacks. The entire judicial process is corrupt and hostile to the principles this country was founded on.

 

[bripat9643]

No one has to concoct" a thing. There is a vast difference between so-called "gay marriage" and miscegenation. Gay marriage defeats the whole point of the institution. Blacks are one of the main opponents of gay marriage, and they find any comparison of it with racial discrimination offensive.

You also think blacks are more racist than whites, lol.

They are.

Gay marriage does nothing to opposite sex marriage. It exists as an entirely separate component within the institution.

Gay marriage makes the institution a joke. It never existed at all until it was invented by the GAYstapo and liberal judges.

Will you be getting divorced then? Are you married? Do you now consider your marriage a joke?

How has the little woman reacted to that revelation on your part?

You will find that a lot fewer people will be getting married. In fact, that's already occurring.

Since when? What's your timeline and where can you attribute this to gays?

Do you have a link to marriage rates by state*? I have one of Divorce Rates. What state has been marrying gays the longest? I'll tell you...Massachusetts (11 years now). Did you know they have one of the lowest divorce rates in the U.S.?

*This is kinda cool...

The colors in your graph get lighter as time goes by. It supports my point.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'll use your own words then:

"Judicial review is not part of the constittuion and is a power the Court dreamed up in Marbury."

Happy now? Need a link to you saying that?

lol

Are you disputing that fact? Please show me where judicial review is mentioned in the COnstitution? I want to see you double down on stupid.

Don't ask me questions until you've answered mine.

And while you're at it, prove that all the judges who upheld same sex marriage were homosexuals.

I'll wait.

"California Same-Sex Marriage Ruling Upheld: Court Won't Overturn Prop 8 Decision Because Judge Was Gay"
California Same-Sex Marriage Ruling Upheld Court Won t Overturn Prop 8 Decision Because Judge Was Gay

His decision was upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7, 2012.

There have been over two score rulings all over the country by justices appointed by Republicans and Democrats. What's the current "score"? Fifty plus rulings in favor of same sex couples having full and equal access to civil marriage and like one or two that said "nah, gays are icky"?

Huh. There's a reason they call that court the "9th Circus." It's populated with leftwing hacks. The entire judicial process is corrupt and hostile to the principles this country was founded on.

"Ninth Circuit Leading the Pack for ‘Most Reversed’"
Ninth Circuit Leading the Pack for Most Reversed National Review Online

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

[
There have been over two score rulings all over the country by justices appointed by Republicans and Democrats. What's the current "score"? Fifty plus rulings in favor of same sex couples having full and equal access to civil marriage and like one or two that said "nah, gays are icky"?

Are you disputing that fact? Please show me where judicial review is mentioned in the COnstitution? I want to see you double down on stupid.

Don't ask me questions until you've answered mine.

And while you're at it, prove that all the judges who upheld same sex marriage were homosexuals.

I'll wait.

"California Same-Sex Marriage Ruling Upheld: Court Won't Overturn Prop 8 Decision Because Judge Was Gay"
California Same-Sex Marriage Ruling Upheld Court Won t Overturn Prop 8 Decision Because Judge Was Gay

His decision was upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7, 2012.

There have been over two score rulings all over the country by justices appointed by Republicans and Democrats. What's the current "score"? Fifty plus rulings in favor of same sex couples having full and equal access to civil marriage and like one or two that said "nah, gays are icky"?

Huh. There's a reason they call that court the "9th Circus." It's populated with leftwing hacks. The entire judicial process is corrupt and hostile to the principles this country was founded on.

"Ninth Circuit Leading the Pack for ‘Most Reversed’"
Ninth Circuit Leading the Pack for Most Reversed National Review Online

That will happen when one tends to rest their decisions in NON SEQUITURS.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

They harp on it because it is the only argument they have. Otherwise there is no reason whatsoever to have "same sex marriage." In fact there is every reason not to. Once marriage can mean anything then it means nothing.

Indeed sir. Particularly given that Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.