Why should other taxpayers have to subsidize gay mating?

[kaz]

Really? Name one

Kaz, you can marry a woman and in some states I can't. That's gender discrimination, plain and simple.

Stupid argument. We could both enter a man/woman marriage in every state.

Show where in the Constitution it says government is gender blind

You really have no clue what marriage is about.

So it's not the government's job to define deviancy, but it is the government's job to decide what "real marriage" is, in fact it's the job of the courts.

That is just stupid, but you are a clown, at least you know that

There's simply no point in explaining it to you again. You're clearly not capable of understanding and now, contributing to your confusion, the forum sees you don't even know what marriage is about.

Here's how you do it. Pretend I didn't drink the liberal kool-aid, explain it to me that way

 

[kaz]

Really? Name one

RKMBrown

What about him?

He's someone you can marry.

I can marry RKMBrown? And I asked if you were eight. Are you?

Yes. So? No.

Well, OK, I'll marry him. But I'll have to get a divorce first. Can you show me the law that since we're straight we can marry?

And if you're not eight, what are you then? Seven?

 

[bripat9643]

Really? Name one

Kaz, you can marry a woman and in some states I can't. That's gender discrimination, plain and simple.

Stupid argument. We could both enter a man/woman marriage in every state.

Show where in the Constitution it says government is gender blind

You really have no clue what marriage is about.

So it's not the government's job to define deviancy, but it is the government's job to decide what "real marriage" is, in fact it's the job of the courts.

That is just stupid, but you are a clown, at least you know that

It's not deciding what "real" marriage is. That's your fallacy.

Of course it's deciding what marriage is. If not, then what is it deciding?

 

[kaz]

The courts have ruled that gender discrimination is perfectly constitutional. In fact, it's legally mandated. Just consider Title XI which forces universities to create women's sports teams.

Do you think men should be allowed to play on the women's basketball team?

Umm... that's not discrimination ... that's equality. Now women can play sports too.

So laws that say "government will do this for women and do something else for men" is not discrimination?

Are you suffering from brain damage?

Cite a specific law and we can discuss it. We can:t discuss the random thoughts floating around inside your skull.

Um, he did, Title IX

And I showed how that provides equality. Weren't you paying attention?

Yes, I just didn't get it because I'm not stupid like you are

 

[bripat9643]

You really have no clue what marriage is about.

Yes he does. It's about reproduction. That's what it has always been about.

Nope, it's not. Many people reproduce without getting married and many married couples never reproduce. I see you're just as ignorant as kaz as to what marriage is about. What a pity. No wonder you two look like such flaming imbeciles arguing against this.

Yeah, and some people drive without a license. Does that mean we don't issue driver's licenses to ensure safety on the road?

The GAYstapo is pathologically stupid.

What a dumb fucking analogy. Driving without a license is illegal. Reproducing without being married is not. Just as Bristol Palin, she can tell you.

LOL, what a clown. You may want to Google the word analogy, since you don't know. An analogy doesn't mean if you identify one difference it's not an analogy. You pointed out people reproduce without a license as an argument that marriage isn't about children. He pointed out people drive without a license too. It was a great point, it killed your argument. Your rebuttal didn't even logically rebut it, you just said there is a different respect they are different, a non-argument

Actually, if there weren't any differences, it wouldn't be an analogy. It would be the exact same thing. Liberal turds always use the "it's not the same" argument whenever confronted with an analogy that demonstrates the stupidity of their ideas.

 

[Faun]

You really have no clue what marriage is about.

Yes he does. It's about reproduction. That's what it has always been about.

Nope, it's not. Many people reproduce without getting married and many married couples never reproduce. I see you're just as ignorant as kaz as to what marriage is about. What a pity. No wonder you two look like such flaming imbeciles arguing against this.

Yeah, and some people drive without a license. Does that mean we don't issue driver's licenses to ensure safety on the road?

The GAYstapo is pathologically stupid.

What a dumb fucking analogy. Driving without a license is illegal. Reproducing without being married is not. Just as Bristol Palin, she can tell you.

LOL, what a clown. You may want to Google the word analogy, since you don't know. An analogy doesn't mean if you identify one difference it's not an analogy. You pointed out people reproduce without a license as an argument that marriage isn't about children. He pointed out people drive without a license too. It was a great point, it killed your argument. Your rebuttal didn't even logically rebut it, you just said there is a different respect they are different, a non-argument

It killed more of your brain cells than it did my argument. His analogy failed miserably since getting a driver's license allows you to drive legally whereas a marriage licence allows you to be married legally -- which has nothing to do with reproduction. G-d, you're an imbecile. I can't believe that actually had to be explained to you.

 

[kaz]

Umm... that's not discrimination ... that's equality. Now women can play sports too.

So laws that say "government will do this for women and do something else for men" is not discrimination?

Are you suffering from brain damage?

Cite a specific law and we can discuss it. We can:t discuss the random thoughts floating around inside your skull.

Um, he did, Title IX

And I showed how that provides equality. Weren't you paying attention?

You showed nothing of the kind. Title XI discriminates against males. Nothing could be more obvious.

This is a nit, but I think you mean Title IX where schools have to provide comparable sports opportunities for girls as boys

 

[bripat9643]

Really? Name one

Kaz, you can marry a woman and in some states I can't. That's gender discrimination, plain and simple.

The courts have ruled that gender discrimination is perfectly constitutional. In fact, it's legally mandated. Just consider Title XI which forces universities to create women's sports teams.

Do you think men should be allowed to play on the women's basketball team?

Umm... that's not discrimination ... that's equality. Now women can play sports too.

So when seawytch claims man woman marriage is "gender discrimination" even though she can't show how women are treated differently, you get it.

When bripat asks so can men be excluded from a women's team, you don't get how that's discrimination

Dude, you aren't supposed to swim in the kool-aid, just sip it

Who on Earth said a man not getting to play on a woman's basketball team is discrimination?? That's fucking retarded. It would be discrimination if the man wasn't allowed to play on any team because he's a man.

You morons will never get it. Because you can't understand, you'll remain baying at the moon.

Morons like you said it when you claimed the fact that a woman can't marry another woman is discrimination.

 

[Faun]

Umm... that's not discrimination ... that's equality. Now women can play sports too.

So laws that say "government will do this for women and do something else for men" is not discrimination?

Are you suffering from brain damage?

Cite a specific law and we can discuss it. We can:t discuss the random thoughts floating around inside your skull.

Um, he did, Title IX

And I showed how that provides equality. Weren't you paying attention?

Yes, I just didn't get it because I'm not stupid like you are

You think two people of opposite gender getting to play basketball is discrimination. You're as dumb as they come.

 

[bripat9643]

No, it's a fact .... married Republican couples really are entitled to the same tax breaks as all other married couples. Do you doubt that?

Seriously, you are actually eight years old, aren't you, Faun?

Faun is just a liberal imbecile who doesn't care about facts or logic. Like all liberals, he wants what he wants whether it's logical or not.

You're so brain-dead, it's not even funny. According to nuts like you, people who are denied inalienable rights should just sit down and shut up and just accept it. You should be thankful our forefathers were not as submissive as you. Perhaps if you had a pair of balls you'd understand.

That's a clown post, bro. Our Forefathers were very aware of marriage. If it's an "inalienable right," then why didn't they mention it in The Constitution or the Declaration of Independence or any other of those documents?

They did mention God a bunch of times, so that would make us a Theocracy, right?

I didn't say marriage was an inalienable right. I said they're being denied an inalienable right. Which they are by being denied marriage. No matter how many times this is explained to you, you still don't get it. That's ok, not everyone is capable of understanding.

In other words, marriage is an inalienable right, only not.

You're right, rational people aren't capable of understanding your "logic."

 

[kaz]

Dude, you aren't supposed to swim in the kool-aid, just sip it

Who on Earth said a man not getting to play on a woman's basketball team is discrimination?? That's fucking retarded. It would be discrimination if the man wasn't allowed to play on any team because he's a man.

You morons will never get it. Because you can't understand, you'll remain baying at the moon.

WTF? That was the question, what if he can't because he's a man? You are actually a little kid, aren't you? Or is it just the clown in you?

 

[bripat9643]

So laws that say "government will do this for women and do something else for men" is not discrimination?

Are you suffering from brain damage?

Cite a specific law and we can discuss it. We can:t discuss the random thoughts floating around inside your skull.

Um, he did, Title IX

And I showed how that provides equality. Weren't you paying attention?

You showed nothing of the kind. Title XI discriminates against males. Nothing could be more obvious.

This is a nit, but I think you mean Title IX where schools have to provide comparable sports opportunities for girls as boys

Ah, yes. You are correct.

 

[bripat9643]

So laws that say "government will do this for women and do something else for men" is not discrimination?

Are you suffering from brain damage?

Cite a specific law and we can discuss it. We can:t discuss the random thoughts floating around inside your skull.

Um, he did, Title IX

And I showed how that provides equality. Weren't you paying attention?

Yes, I just didn't get it because I'm not stupid like you are

You think two people of opposite gender getting to play basketball is discrimination. You're as dumb as they come.

According to the logic of queer marriage supporters, that is discrimination.

 

[kaz]

Stupid argument. We could both enter a man/woman marriage in every state.

Show where in the Constitution it says government is gender blind

You really have no clue what marriage is about.

Yes he does. It's about reproduction. That's what it has always been about.

Nope, it's not. Many people reproduce without getting married and many married couples never reproduce. I see you're just as ignorant as kaz as to what marriage is about. What a pity. No wonder you two look like such flaming imbeciles arguing against this.

Yes, I don't know what marriage is about, you do. It's about tax breaks and government validation. No one thinks it's about children, WTF, where do I get such a ridiculous idea? Dunno. Maybe because I am a member of the human race and I am not a collectivist with a vacuum between my ears. Could be...

Nope, it's not about those either, those are just benefits. You really are cluless.

Yes, no one thinks marriage is about having children, what a stupid idea. Why would anyone think that. I'm hitting myself right now for thinking such a stupid thing

 

[Faun]

Umm... that's not discrimination ... that's equality. Now women can play sports too.

So laws that say "government will do this for women and do something else for men" is not discrimination?

Are you suffering from brain damage?

Cite a specific law and we can discuss it. We can:t discuss the random thoughts floating around inside your skull.

I already did: Title XI which mandates that schools and universities create sports teams especially for women and spend enormous sums of money on them even though they don't bring in any revenue.

And I pointed out, that's equallity. That's saying what is accessible to one gender must be made accessible to the other. Who knows how your diseased brain sees that as different.

Wrong, that's legally enforced discrimination. "Equality" in the sense you use it to refer to marriage, would mean that men could play on the women's basketball team and use the women's locker room.

It means no such thing. You're a fucking moron.

 

[kaz]

No, it's a fact .... married Republican couples really are entitled to the same tax breaks as all other married couples. Do you doubt that?

Seriously, you are actually eight years old, aren't you, Faun?

Faun is just a liberal imbecile who doesn't care about facts or logic. Like all liberals, he wants what he wants whether it's logical or not.

You're so brain-dead, it's not even funny. According to nuts like you, people who are denied inalienable rights should just sit down and shut up and just accept it. You should be thankful our forefathers were not as submissive as you. Perhaps if you had a pair of balls you'd understand.

That's a clown post, bro. Our Forefathers were very aware of marriage. If it's an "inalienable right," then why didn't they mention it in The Constitution or the Declaration of Independence or any other of those documents?

They did mention God a bunch of times, so that would make us a Theocracy, right?

I didn't say marriage was an inalienable right. I said they're being denied an inalienable right. Which they are by being denied marriage. No matter how many times this is explained to you, you still don't get it. That's ok, not everyone is capable of understanding.

Marriage is not an inalienable right, but denying marriage is denying an inalienable right.

If mothers only would read this and realize what liberalism does to your brain, they would make sure none of you ever existed again

 

[kaz]

Stupid argument. We could both enter a man/woman marriage in every state.

Show where in the Constitution it says government is gender blind

You really have no clue what marriage is about.

So it's not the government's job to define deviancy, but it is the government's job to decide what "real marriage" is, in fact it's the job of the courts.

That is just stupid, but you are a clown, at least you know that

It's not deciding what "real" marriage is. That's your fallacy.

Right, "deciding what real marriage is" is according to the clown in the conversation a job for government. But it isn't, it's for the people. Well, if the people follow his rules that it's two people. Who aren't related too closely. And they are adults. Or not, government can decide that in allowing the people to do it. But that has nothing to do with government deciding, it's up to government to decide that.

You are a confused little boy

Nope. Again, "real marriage" is a strawman of your own silly concoction.

Another clown post, you introduced the "real marriage" term, Opie

 

[Faun]

That's a clown post, bro. Like I'm telling you... Was that a lame attempt at a joke or are you just stupid?

No, it's a fact .... married Republican couples really are entitled to the same tax breaks as all other married couples. Do you doubt that?

Seriously, you are actually eight years old, aren't you, Faun?

Faun is just a liberal imbecile who doesn't care about facts or logic. Like all liberals, he wants what he wants whether it's logical or not.

You're so brain-dead, it's not even funny. According to nuts like you, people who are denied inalienable rights should just sit down and shut up and just accept it. You should be thankful our forefathers were not as submissive as you. Perhaps if you had a pair of balls you'd understand.

What "unalienable rights?" Marriage rights are clearly alienable. SS survivor benefits aren't something you can exercise if you're stranded on a desert island.

Already explained many times. You don'don't get it and you never will.

 

[Faun]

Umm... that's not discrimination ... that's equality. Now women can play sports too.

So laws that say "government will do this for women and do something else for men" is not discrimination?

Are you suffering from brain damage?

Cite a specific law and we can discuss it. We can:t discuss the random thoughts floating around inside your skull.

Um, he did, Title IX

And I showed how that provides equality. Weren't you paying attention?

You showed nothing of the kind. Title XI discriminates against males. Nothing could be more obvious.

Nope, males get to play basketball. No discrimination there.

 

[Faun]

You really have no clue what marriage is about.

So it's not the government's job to define deviancy, but it is the government's job to decide what "real marriage" is, in fact it's the job of the courts.

That is just stupid, but you are a clown, at least you know that

It's not deciding what "real" marriage is. That's your fallacy.

Right, "deciding what real marriage is" is according to the clown in the conversation a job for government. But it isn't, it's for the people. Well, if the people follow his rules that it's two people. Who aren't related too closely. And they are adults. Or not, government can decide that in allowing the people to do it. But that has nothing to do with government deciding, it's up to government to decide that.

You are a confused little boy

Nope. Again, "real marriage" is a strawman of your own silly concoction.

Another clown post, you introduced the "real marriage" term, Opie

If that were true, you'd be able to quote me using the term "real marriage" without quoting your use of it..... but you can't.