The Top Ten Reasons Gay Marriage is Un-American

reply to post by grover

---

No one picked on me, they were to cowardly. I was a book worm and a teachers pet at times but being 6 foot and somewhat burly I could hit harder than them, so I was a protector of my smaller weaker friends.

The one time I did get picked on the boy got sent home with a broken nose.

I'm not one to be picked on, so if someone was gonna bully me, they were going to learn how it feels to be beaten bloody.

[edit on 4/12/2008 by Good Wolf]

reply to post by grover

---

I always chuckle when some one says being gay is not natural, they obviously have no idea what they are talking about. I am gay and I assure you I WAS BORN this way. Many times I wished It wasen't true. (Had a lot of straight friends and wanted to blenned in). No more. I'm very happy where I am now. You are born gay, like being born with blue eyes and brown hair. One can chose to be celibate however, but that applies to straight people as well.

And for those of you who say "no animal is gay", you need to watch wild kingdom more often.




[edit on Mon Dec 22 2008 by Jbird]

This one made me laugh more than the stab at Brittany Spears marriage. It's all so stupid really.

If you guys have not seen Prop 8 the musical, you're all missing out.

Prop 8 - The Musical

[edit on 4/12/2008 by Good Wolf]

reply to post by GamerGal

---

GamerGal is so cute! Everytime I see GamerGal I can see a maze in her eyes, because my heart gets lost when ever I see her.

reply to post by gordonwest

---

What a line...

Keep it in your pants, I know she's pretty but my god man- have some dignity.


[edit on 5-12-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]

reply to post by GamerGal

---

You shouldnt be so full of yourself. Not everyone would agree.

Back on subject....I dont see anything in the list of 10 that would convince me that gay marriage would be un-American. I see none at all. Its all a matter of letting people live their lives as they prefer to. Even "hottie" there has a right to call herself "hottie" if she likes, but that doesnt mean I have to agree, but I wont try to stop her from living her life or convincing her I dont think she is so "hottie". I would allow the respect and room for it...its called tolorance.

Same with gay/lesbians. They should be allowed to live their lives as they see fit, get married, whatever. I dont have to agree with it, I dont have to like it, but I certianly wont get in their way of how they want to live.

Tolorance people...its all about tolorance.

Perhaps if people tolorate others a little more, the people can focus on matters that warrent more attention.



Cheers!!!!

Oh please ! dont tell me youve never wanted to at least try anal sex ?
Anyone thats says that is not fooling anyone except themselves .


I know some gay guys SAY THEY DONT to avoid the stigma of being gay but lets not kid ourselves .

I know a lot of straight women find it demeaning and unpleasurable but thats neither here nor there .

It was meant as a satire of the anti-gay marriage stance. Grossly misrepresenting that side of the argument to create humorous ridicule.

For Lulz.

reply to post by gordonwest

---

Normally I'd alert it as off topic, but thanks lol. BTW, are you related to Adam West? On topic... I heard there were more then ten, could any one post the rest? And Burns, I can't be full of myself, I have others to fill me up! lol I crack myself up sometimes.

[edit on 6-12-2008 by GamerGal]

I posted the full text as I found it. Of course anyone is free to add more. I added...

... of course gays should be allowed to marry... why should they be the only one's who are happy?

Of course I didn't come up with it some comedian did.... still a good line is a terrible thing to waste.

reply to post by grover

---

I thought the quote was "un-happy". Am I wrong?

reply to post by Good Wolf

---

That's how I've heard it.

reply to post by grover

---

Must have been retold a few times and got "Chinese whispers"-ed up a bit I guess.

We're not allowed to mention other websites....but there is something, free here on the 'InterTubes' available for all to see, which is a poignant three-minute 'musical' that lambastes 'Prop 8' --- it is a star-studded production!!

(hint)....it was written by 'Hairspray' writer Marc Shaiman....enjoy!!!

reply to post by weedwhacker

---

Second hint: Think about how large the 'marriage industry' is!!!

And, don't get me started about how many divorce lawyers would lick their chops at the idea of having more clients........

reply to post by weedwhacker

---

I mentioned it.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Good Wolf

---

GW....I hope EVERYONE links onto what you posted....

Sorry if I'm too obvious, perhaps you would have wished me to be more discrete....however, the time for 'discretion' is long past....

No dis-respect to the OP....(and EVERYONE should take the time to read EVERY page)...but, let's discuss 'marriage', shall we???

First off, 'marriage' is not a Biblical concept! (Oh yes, THEY would like you to believe it is!!!)

I challenge anyone to study the Scriptures and find any reference to 'marriage'....I'm talking both OT and NT here....good luck!

Let's now examine the case of a man and a woman....people that I actually know...who decided to have a civil ceremony for purely legal reasons. They got 'married', after living together for about 15 years, just in case one of them died. Of course, since they were a 'man' and a 'woman', no one blinked an eye...

Now, keep this concept in mind --- two people, who HAPPENED to be in a heterosexual relationship, even IF they were not 'married' during those fifteen years, STILL had every right to 'marry', under the "LAW"....

HOWEVER....two other individuals, you may have been together for the same period of time, but just happen to be of the same sex DO NOT have the same right???? By 'right' I mean, equal protection under the Constitution of the United States of America.

I write this as a child of a divorced couple....I saw my Mother meet a new man, and they lived together, unmarried, for many years.....until they realized that "marriage", as a State Contract, held many more opportunities than did, for instance, "Common Bond"....

Problem is, "marriage" IS defined State-by-State, and does not have a definition of the Federal level. Except, of course, the notion that ANY marriage in ANY State is automatically recognized, by every other of the 49 States....and thus, we have the ISSUE....and the problem with what is termed 'Gay Marriage'....and this nasty proposition to amend the United States Constitution....oh, it starts at the State's levels, but don't fool yourselves, there is a compulsion from people who are simply 'Brown-Shirts' in disquise to impel their agenda....

Here's something to consider: About 50 percent of heterosexual Marriages result in divorce. (And, I think I'm underestimating....)

Let's consider heterosexuals, for a minute...a 50 percent failure rate???

OK....that means more 'weddings'.....in Las Vegas or Reno????

NOW, let's consider actual Gay people who wish to 'tie the knot'....and think about how much money they would be willing to spend!!!!

Certainly, various straight entrepeneurs can begin to see the benefits, and the possible profits????

reply to post by weedwhacker

---

Actually, it's over 51%, and over 75% of the people who marry before the age of 25 end up in divorce. Yet how many of them voted that Gays can't get married? If divorced you sure as hell shouldn't be able to tell other people they can't get married. It would be like a draft dodging coke head who went AWOL after his daddy got him a posh job in the National Guard running the military it just doesn't make sense.

As an ignorant bystander, the two women problem, is apparently inability to only become sexually gratified. Is there any thought to child bearing as the proper progression of a sexual act? I can understand why testosterone has been accused of closet gay.
I'm just wandering in the quest for gratification, perhaps being psychologically unbalance has made you miss the gratification, so that it appears unobtainable.
The wish for more than one natural sex partner is no validation for homsexual conduct. We'd have to believe that homosexual conduct was the purpose for normal human sexual intercourse.
Frankenstein just don't cut it for human association, I'd be careful in my quest for gratification of a mental fantasy.
As far as I'm concern there are just to many people who lack the attention they deserve. Sex starved? How did they get like that? Left the hand long ago, kicked the vibrator to the curb? Just not into object love any more, and you some how believe that habit doesn't culminate in the rape of a minor or adult.
I think frankenstein needs counseling if "it" is to believe it had ever receive the proper human association.

I wish people would not look down on people for having a different sexuality. It gets old. DX I hate having to deal with homophobes. If the federal government took hold of the issue and legalized it, it would be like a long overdue slap in the face to homophobics all around.

[edit on 17-12-2008 by veryrandomannonomous]