Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We had a child custody dispute here in Idaho a number of years ago and the ruling was if he lived with his partner (of MANY years) he would NOT be granted custody or even VISTITATION of HIS children. His partner had to get a trailer home a few hundred feet away for his partner to get to see his children. WHAT FREAKING HYPOCRICY!!! I believe that some Conservatives would RATHER have kids raised in an ABUSIVE Hetro home than a LOVING homo home. FREAKING INSANE!!
Well, in Florida we tend to take a dim view of Homosexuals...
They're prohibited from enaging in anything where Children are present; and this due to the fact that homosexuals are, by definition, sexual devients; demonstrated by their proclaimed sexual orientation that they are already prone towards making poor choices with regard to their sexual desires.
They can't adopt a child; can't be foster parents... even relative placement is forbidden for homosexuals.
This notion that deviency is something akin to normalcy is absurd... right along with the notion that encouraging deviency will somehow result in something other than more of it; and/or that exposing children to it is something other than criminal immorality.
OK, let's use your logic.
I love my brother, he loves me. We care for each other. We trust each other with our lives. We can't get married to each other, so therefore, according to you, we are denied rights and privileges available to other Americans. And we aren't even homosexuals.
How would you consummate your marriage? No details please.
Consummation of marriage is a religious thing. I'm not religious.
F
A
I
L
Spells rdean
Care to address the point I made? Or do you just want to try and pretend your opinion is a fact?
Name one right of yours that has been infringed upon.
The right attempted to teach "magical creation" at the school my children attended. Because of the cost of the lawsuit, they not only didn't teach "magical creation", but also stopped teaching any part of biology, physiology and botany that may have touched on evolution. The same is true in many schools across the nation. Schools just don't have the money to fight religious right wing wackos so they stop teaching anything controversial.
That's one.
That's a right?
Well to be a right, it would come with a sustaining responsibility... you didn't mention such, and given that you 'feel' so strongly in your intellectual prowess... it's odd that ya wouldn't note the essential responsibility which are intrisic to all rights; so I thought I'd give ya the courtesy of presenting the chance to do so.
There's no proponent of creationism that contests any of the tangible sciences... the assertion is ludicrous. Schools don't exist in a vacuum... and what they teach should reflect the beliefs of their communities.
Your position is nothing less than a demand that schools must teach only what you feel is relevant to education... and that sis is YOU FORCING YOUR BELIEFS ON OTHERS. That you don't get that, is YOU demonstrating that YOU are a DUMBASS!
Your Nephew has a Right to serve his country... and that right comes with the responsibility to conduct herself so as to meet the high standards required for applicants for such... Your Nephew chose to reject her responsibility; choosing instead to succumb to her twisted sexual cravings... Therefore; your nephew is not qualified to be in the US military, because she's queer. The 'anti-fag thing' is based in science... common sense and sound moral reasoning.
Science... Homosexuality is an incontrovertible ABNORMAL SEXUALITY...
Common Sense... Normalizing sexuality can only encourage others to succumb to the obsession of abnormal cravings...
Sound moral reasoning... Encouraging others to succumb to obsessive abnormal cravings, can only undermine cultural standards of behavior, promoting cultural decadence and lending to the destruction of individuals that comprise the culture; thus the inevtiable demise of the culture itself.
Bullshit...
Your nephew can get married anytime she wants, as long as she applies with a person of the opposite gender.
People come to my front door and try to spread that crappy "supernatural" nonsense. I found them talking to my kids. I was furious. That stuff is crap. It's not real.
That's four.
Wow... spreading the good word to your hellians? SAY IT AINT SO!
But hey... that's free speech for ya.
Believe me, you asked for one, but I'll stop at four.
Oh!... Now that's too bad... it was just getting interestin'.
They also applied to any black person who married someone of their own race. SCOTUS already ruled such laws unconstitutional in Loving V. Virginia
You don't get it, do you?
The argument you are trying to use specifically identified people based upon an identifiable and obvious characteristic (black skin). Those outdated (and now non-existent) laws specifically said "black". Where is a law that specifically says "homosexual"?
There are some blacks that you might assume were "white". Conversely, there are some "gays" you would never, ever take for anything except gay. And if you don't believe that, you live a very sheltered life indeed.
How would you consummate your marriage? No details please.
Consummation of marriage is a religious thing. I'm not religious.
F
A
I
L
Spells rdean
Care to address the point I made? Or do you just want to try and pretend your opinion is a fact?
A "marriage" with no sex? How is that a marriage? Why not just make him a "dependent"?
OK, let's use your logic.Why do you continue this asinine argument?
The facts are these people love each other, they care for each other, they trust each other with their lives. They are being denied rights and privleges available to other Americans.
To say, you have the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as everyone else does is ridiculous.
I love my brother, he loves me. We care for each other. We trust each other with our lives. We can't get married to each other, so therefore, according to you, we are denied rights and privileges available to other Americans. And we aren't even homosexuals.
How would you consummate your marriage? No details please.
The right to enter freely into legally binding contracts with another person.Let's try this again: there is no "right" to be in a government-subsidized romantic relationship. The government doesn't "owe" you its blessing, and no, saying that it does doesn't make it so.
The right attempted to teach "magical creation" at the school my children attended. Because of the cost of the lawsuit, they not only didn't teach "magical creation", but also stopped teaching any part of biology, physiology and botany that may have touched on evolution. The same is true in many schools across the nation. Schools just don't have the money to fight religious right wing wackos so they stop teaching anything controversial.
That's one.
That's a right?
Well to be a right, it would come with a sustaining responsibility... you didn't mention such, and given that you 'feel' so strongly in your intellectual prowess... it's odd that ya wouldn't note the essential responsibility which are intrisic to all rights; so I thought I'd give ya the courtesy of presenting the chance to do so.
There's no proponent of creationism that contests any of the tangible sciences... the assertion is ludicrous. Schools don't exist in a vacuum... and what they teach should reflect the beliefs of their communities.
Your position is nothing less than a demand that schools must teach only what you feel is relevant to education... and that sis is YOU FORCING YOUR BELIEFS ON OTHERS. That you don't get that, is YOU demonstrating that YOU are a DUMBASS!
Your Nephew has a Right to serve his country... and that right comes with the responsibility to conduct herself so as to meet the high standards required for applicants for such... Your Nephew chose to reject her responsibility; choosing instead to succumb to her twisted sexual cravings... Therefore; your nephew is not qualified to be in the US military, because she's queer. The 'anti-fag thing' is based in science... common sense and sound moral reasoning.
Science... Homosexuality is an incontrovertible ABNORMAL SEXUALITY...
Common Sense... Normalizing sexuality can only encourage others to succumb to the obsession of abnormal cravings...
Sound moral reasoning... Encouraging others to succumb to obsessive abnormal cravings, can only undermine cultural standards of behavior, promoting cultural decadence and lending to the destruction of individuals that comprise the culture; thus the inevtiable demise of the culture itself.
Bullshit...
Your nephew can get married anytime she wants, as long as she applies with a person of the opposite gender.
Wow... spreading the good word to your hellians? SAY IT AINT SO!
But hey... that's free speech for ya.
Believe me, you asked for one, but I'll stop at four.
Oh!... Now that's too bad... it was just getting interestin'.
You proved your point. You are definitely an ass.
Nope... But you aren't Denied Marriage... You are Denied the Special Priviledge of Redifining Marriage in Law to Include only your Deviation Exclusively to others that are being Denied.
Marriage is what it is... Have a Civil Union and be Happy the Religion of Peace and Love isn't the Law of THIS Land, Missy...
peace...
Everything you just named applies to heterosexual people if they choose to marry a person of the same sex.
Again, the law is applied equally, it doesn't specifically say anything about being homosexual.
They also applied to any black person who married someone of their own race. SCOTUS already ruled such laws unconstitutional in Loving V. Virginia
You don't get it, do you?
The argument you are trying to use specifically identified people based upon an identifiable and obvious characteristic (black skin). Those outdated (and now non-existent) laws specifically said "black". Where is a law that specifically says "homosexual"?
Sure, gays could marry straights for "benefits". The benefit could include social acceptance or social status. Ask Larry Craig or Ted Haggard.
The question is, would you want your sister or daughter to marry a gay? Or a man who was straight and could give her the kind of love, that you as a caring parent would want your child to have?
You see, logically, your argument seems to make sense. But when you include human emotion, empathy and love, it becomes as stupid as dirt.
As a brother, I don't care who my sister is romantically or sexually involved with, that's her decision.
As a father, I do care who my children are romantically and sexually involved with, but my children are of legal age and their decisions are theirs to make regardless of how I think or feel about those decisions.
As soon as my sister, my brother or my children have their rights restricted or removed based upon a law that specifically identifies sexual orientation as it's reasoning, I will fight to the death to defend them.[/quote]
If they are homosexual, then you should be fighting- unless, that is, you are a liar.
Wrong.Homosexuals CHOOSE to be homosexuals...
And once you express your attitude one way or the other, you are no longer indifferent.I don't think you really understand the meaning of indifferent.
I do. One can not care about an issue, but care about how that issue is treated.
The right to enter freely into legally binding contracts with another person.Let's try this again: there is no "right" to be in a government-subsidized romantic relationship. The government doesn't "owe" you its blessing, and no, saying that it does doesn't make it so.
As if anyone on the right even cares. How many times do you have to go over it? Even worse, they come up with the most lame and stupid arguments.
One more time.
Since someone else mentioned the military. What do you get from the military.
Guaranteed student loan
Guaranteed home loan
VA benefits
burial benefits
benefits to children
First, there are only a handful of states that allow civil unions. Civil unions are generally NOT recognized by other states as opposed to marriage.
Some benefits if marriage:
Joint parental rights of children
Joint adoption
Status as "next-of-kin" for hospital visits and medical decisions
Right to make a decision about the disposal of loved ones remains
Immigration and residency for partners from other countries
Crime victims recovery benefits
Domestic violence protection orders
Judicial protections and immunity
Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will
Public safety officers death benefits
Spousal veterans benefits
Social Security
Medicare
Joint filing of tax returns
Wrongful death benefits for surviving partner and children
Bereavement or sick leave to care for partner or children
Child support
Joint Insurance Plans
Tax credits including: Child tax credit, Hope and lifetime learning credits
Deferred Compensation for pension and IRAs
Estate and gift tax benefits
Welfare and public assistance
Joint housing for elderly
Credit protection
Medical care for survivors and dependents of certain veterans
And those are only "SOME".
I'm tired of stupid, dumbass right wingers saying "name a right gays don't get".
You would get things mixed up, wouldn't you? When people ask that question, they're referring to "rights" in the civil and individual sense, since many gay rights advocates will quickly tell you the gay political agenda is something of a civil rights movement. Listing benefits gay couples don't receive actually doesn't answer their question. If they really meant, "name regulated benefits gay couples don't get", then shoot, I'd be in the same boat as a straight, single male, and not only that, but there are plenty of benefits I don't get that I might want.
Let's try this again: there is no "right" to be in a government-subsidized romantic relationship. The government doesn't "owe" you its blessing, and no, saying that it does doesn't make it so.
But a straight single male can get married if they want.
Are you saying that the Bill of Rights lists all rights afforded American citizens?
Nope... But you aren't Denied Marriage... You are Denied the Special Priviledge of Redifining Marriage in Law to Include only your Deviation Exclusively to others that are being Denied.
Marriage is what it is... Have a Civil Union and be Happy the Religion of Peace and Love isn't the Law of THIS Land, Missy...
peace...
That sounds likek a death threat from the Religion of Peace and Love.
How do gays marrying affect a single straight marraige?
Waiting.
Still waiting.
Thought so.
Not to another gay male, the person he would chose to marry.You would get things mixed up, wouldn't you? When people ask that question, they're referring to "rights" in the civil and individual sense, since many gay rights advocates will quickly tell you the gay political agenda is something of a civil rights movement. Listing benefits gay couples don't receive actually doesn't answer their question. If they really meant, "name regulated benefits gay couples don't get", then shoot, I'd be in the same boat as a straight, single male, and not only that, but there are plenty of benefits I don't get that I might want.
Let's try this again: there is no "right" to be in a government-subsidized romantic relationship. The government doesn't "owe" you its blessing, and no, saying that it does doesn't make it so.
But a straight single male can get married if they want.
So can a gay single male.
44?not to another gay male, the person he would chose to marry.but a straight single male can get married if they want.
so can a gay single male.
Not in 45 states at least.
Your position is nothing less than a demand that schools must teach only what you feel is relevant to education... and that sis is YOU FORCING YOUR BELIEFS ON OTHERS. That you don't get that, is YOU demonstrating that YOU are a DUMBASS!
Science... Homosexuality is an incontrovertible ABNORMAL SEXUALITY...
Common Sense... Normalizing sexuality can only encourage others to succumb to the obsession of abnormal cravings...
Maine's not a full go yet.44?not to another gay male, the person he would chose to marry.so can a gay single male.
Not in 45 states at least.
