Like it or not, all 50 States must now recognize Gay Marriages!

page: 25
29
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by A Fortiori


Polygamist handle problem in their community? You're stereotyping you know. Do you really believe there is only Polygamy in certain religious orders?


How again am I doing that? I'm not talking about just Mormons. I've referenced a family of "witches" (their personal label), this group on this board as poly-amorous, and having lived abroad in cultures where it was legal, I can say that Jains, Hindus, Muslims, and more have polygamous marriage.


Did I mention Mormons?

Do you not think there are just independent regular people not affiliated with any group or religion who practice polygamy?


Obviously, there are. There is one posting on this thread.


Don't take offense - its just how I see it. To me - you keep putting things in society programmed "neat little boxes".


Kinda like the one you're putting me in? *smiles and winks*

I am posting on a web board, and am obviously not putting the entirety of my thoughts on a particular subject or even my complete and total opinion. I'm sort of just posting like everyone else. The "neat little boxes" are examples, not a complete list of what I am referencing.


Like when you said - what if a man saw his wife with some hot young guy. Why not just another guy? Why not an older guy? Why does it have to be a hot young guy?


I was being descriptive? Why did I use "washing machine"? Do you think I was thinking that sex with another man would only bother a husband if done on an appliance? Why didn't I bring up women?

I really only wrote back because I saw that you posted and didn't want to seem a rude pup. I'm more excited about the Alex Jones thing at the moment.

I just wanted you to better understand me. If I was overly "flavorful" or pristine it was in presenting an argument that I'm currently "thinking over" and not really "set" in my own head. I can say that right now I don't think I am for polygamy, but my internal jury is only out, it hasn't come back in yet.

Thanks for the back and forth. *smiles again*

Now, back to the Alex Jones debacle...




posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by A Fortiori

I really only wrote back because I saw that you posted and didn't want to seem a rude pup. I'm more excited about the Alex Jones thing at the moment.

I just wanted you to better understand me. If I was overly "flavorful" or pristine it was in presenting an argument that I'm currently "thinking over" and not really "set" in my own head. I can say that right now I don't think I am for polygamy, but my internal jury is only out, it hasn't come back in yet.

Thanks for the back and forth. *smiles again*

Now, back to the Alex Jones debacle...


Yes I have enjoyed the "back and forth" immensely. I am sorry you took the defensive route.

I gave up Alex Jones at least 4 years ago.



posted on Sep, 9 2009 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Well, when Rage Against the Machine got back together I figured it was time to give the old boy another chance...



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts

So, it's in the works. If and when DOMA is struck down, it will then open the door to striking down anti-gay marriage laws in the remaining States.


Not here in my State it won't and from what I hear, Many Californiansseeing Gays whining because they can't take no for an answer are getting ready for a "shock n brawl" demonstration. that the people keep having to quietly tell Gays NO, over and over that Same sex marriage is an oxymoron. Their are also plans to have straight people cancel plans for weddings hurting the wedding industry, and some pretty clever anti gay marches in the works where they will use a bullhorn to blast the recorded presentations of Gays teaching tolerance classes but really talking about how to have gay sex. I think gays are going to push this thing till it makes an honest person out of them in one respect.

That whenever they call the supporters of family values, be it full of hatred and / or bigotry, most of those being labeled that believe it is time gays find out, how they justify their hatred and bigotry. Many have said they will never hire them again, and that if they actually believe we are all hating them, what's the difference.

If they invade the long history of the sacred tradition of marriage to mean anything other than one man and one woman, they are ging to get hatred and bigotry the likes they have never seen.

You know, they don't show this kind of thing on the news or media much and for the most part, Conservatives, many straight people etc,. believe they should do their talking in the voting booth but not anymore.

I got an email from my uncle that the headlines said, "Maybe its about time gay and lesbian supporters of same sex marriage, see what we are really like when we hate them.

At least then, they will have seen the difference and it's not gonna be pretty. ". Rather than having children reading all the sugary propaganda about gay sex distributed by the Dept of Heatlth, They are going to counter those with their own version, with images I can't even post here but I can say, it will shock many.

Gays at bathhouses bending over picking up what looks to be fecal matter and prolapsed anal images. Statististics of gay diseases and images of advanced stages of same. The family and parents of many in Mass want to "gross people out", of any thoughts or ideas they may have got from those so callled tolerance classes, of subjecting themselves to that behavior. They have anticipated the gays typical handling of Americans who have the foresight and the wisdom to know marriage is NOT about equal rights, it's about protecting institutions from becoming gay, and what to say when gays tell them, they are full of hatred and / bigotry, to prove them right by chanting all kinds of things and many are getting ideas about a march or divorce as if to say, you have contaminated our marriage so we don't want it anymore getting a day of protest, a day for divorce. All divorce decrees giving homosexuals insulting marriage as the reason for theirs.

Illustrations depicting gays screaming at their discenting opposition calling them bigots full of hate and how anti gay marriage proponents saying look see the monkeys hating the other monkeys throwing their feces at them, proves it is natural and we can't help who we choose to hate.


In other words , homophobia is something we are born with and not to give a damn. One line on the brochure says "Gays are all about tolerance" while some guy is locked into a contraption prolapsed anus says, "some things simply aren't designed to tolerate gay love".


Signs saying, "If gays say I'm not Christian enough, it's because their isn't a pile of rocks at the ready to stone them with. "


I have seen some I can't begin to repeat but I understand their resolve and why they are taking such an angry position that is looking more combustable all the time.


Information on how to tell if your son or daughter is hanging out with homosexuals with editorials and speeches by former gays who will tell them the truth of the gay lifestyle and how they escaped it and have no familiarity with it today. How the Gay agenda is planning to have access to our children to expose them to the lifestyle, encuorage them to try it and without any inhibitions or religious programming.

Yeah, I think Gays should of been careful for all they alleged of many of these people, because now, they couldn't care less if they hate em or what gays say or think of them.

If they keep pushing we the people to bring marriage to mean the same as those brochures represent. They are going to get cambodian on the gay culture and many Gay people with high profile positions in the media. Like ellen degeneres, Oprah's best friend ( who ever that is ) someone named King or I can't recall but I always wondered about Oprah and apparently the stedman deal is for her public image . Maybe perez hilton should "OUT" her.

It'll be interesting to see, but if they actually go all out like that,

I can't say I blame them.






[edit on 10-9-2009 by Stylez]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 06:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Stylez
 


Spoken with the true voice of the satanic 'christian'. And what is funny is that people with those rather ignorant and base thoughts of complete darkness and evil, believe they are 'saved' and will inhabit the kingdom of heaven. All I can do is feel pity really.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 07:31 AM
link   


Two tax paying adults who both understand what they are getting into is vastly different than an adult and someone who thinks Spongebob lives in the TV. What's more it is really an insult to even compare the two! Pedophilia is the most disgusting abhorrent act that defies the larger Natural Law that the adult must protect the young. Having dealt with people who have been harmed in that manner I can tell you that it is vastly, vastly different. A child doesn't have a choice when a bigger person tries to force themselves upon them, nor do a lot of the animals that get wrangled into sickness.

Absolutely, what a wild and idiotic comparison! Two adults deciding to be together in whatever kind of relationship, is based on equality. But animals and children are forced, they don't choose to be involved in sexual relationships with adult humans. It is sick and it's damaging to them.
I have never understand the debat about permitting gays to get married, or why a man or woman shouldn't be able to have more than one spouse. If all adults agree, then who cares? Why should the state make such personal decisions? Obviously these laws are religion based, but isn't it time they should be re evaluated?



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by DarknessFollows
Obviously these laws are religion based, but isn't it time they should be re evaluated?


YES!

Religion is personal. "Your" religion has no business infringing on my life.

NO Religion in government - Period.

For all those who automatically choose to label me Atheist. I am a member of the "Center for Spiritual Living". Formerly Religious Science/Science of mind (not Christian Science - not Scientology). I was raised Christian - by choice I am not. I find it to be a man-made religion for political control.

I hope the lawsuits result in gay marriage being declared legal by the supreme court.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarknessFollows
Why should the state make such personal decisions? Obviously these laws are religion based, but isn't it time they should be re evaluated?


Gee guy I have already given the political and social ramifications of the same sex marriage oxymoron, what more can one say. It isn't like the Government is telling them who they can have sex with, live with, love, and it isn't like the Government is at the dictates of the Church either. The Government has a responsibility to the community to promote that which is in the best interests of the family and the family connection to the community as a whole.

NO one benefits from the same sex marriage oxymoron, no one save for those self centered Gay activist militants who can not for what ever the reason is, understand that this is not “equate” into a civil rights issue. You can "Compare" it to one but when you actually look at this, from the context of anyone else’s sexual priori , this same issue could have been brought about by singles wanting the benefits and tax breaks of families by using a particular sexual behavior such as masturbation and argued "why should anyone care that I am a-sexual" “ I should be able to marry myself” or if this was an issue brought by brothers and sisters wanting to marry, MOST would have no hesitation saying "That's stupid!"

Many may argue that inbred children pose unique problems as a burden on both the parents and society where if it were gays to say that, I would have to ask where their concern was for families and children and disease when it was about them getting married or their desire to have more rights than the rest of us by allowing them to qualify under that same kind of false dichotomy.

I the end, the only thing that suffers is the images and impressions this will create for marriage as a concept for unions based on one man and one woman. If gays want to get married, no one is saying they can't because their gay, what they want to do is cry and whine that woman don't turn them on sexually. OK but that isn't our problem, it is there's and if that is true, chances are they won't have much potential for wanting or accomplishing the birth of a child for a family, so then why get married in the first place? They tell us about how unfair it is when they can't see their lover in a hospital for instance. THAT is what civil union contracts are for which is nothing more than the same type of insurance rider attached to the family unions called marriages.

Marriage is like a business; Gay's are merely couples with privileges that only the two involved benefit from the relationship to the other. So why do THEY deserve the perks family not only needs but deserves when Gays contribute nothing to the benefit of the community and obviously are only interested in taking the perks and in exchange we get the exquisite experience to be called every name and label you can come up with in an ad hom personal attack such as the one the intolerant oneclick leveled on me. It seems pretty obvious that you can call people anything you want as long as you're gay playing the victim dictum because those are seen as not personal insults but, oh I don't know, but I can tell you what they are not. They are not going to make anyone say to themselves, OH MY, Oneclick is right! They are not going to be taken as "constructive criticism" they are not going to be conducive to building any compromises, in fact I can think of only ONE reason, oneclick and every other homosexual one doesn't agree with on this issue, says them.

To insult people who have just as much rights to defend their ideas of marriage and their right to free speech and opinion, their right to like or dis like any thing they want.

Here is just another backlash I heard last night. That many employees working in corporations where openly gay individuals have been "tolerated" (ironic isn’t it) are thinking of suing these corporations for gays complimenting any straight guys on what they were wearing and framing it as if it is sexual harassment. This is what the Fireman had done who were ordered to cover the Gay parade. The sued and won their law suit against the homosexuals that were whistling and making cat calls yelling “ show me your hose!”

Straights creating a backlash agenda because they have had enough of what “gays want” or think is “progressive” by suing them for sexual harrasement? That is just one of the many plans I have seen at family mettings and these people are not religious, they are just intolerant because gays have pushed them to the very last nerve and some of the ideas they have been proposing to sanction Gays for the health risks they are statistically shown they are responsible for spreading in the united states may seem radical, but for some reason, they want to make it a "zero tolerance" with that as the new mantra for a "shove it in your face" straight backlash response to the Gay militant that just doesn't get it and doesn't care.

They justify this kind of agenda for such inconsiderate and ir-responsible sexual behavior such as bare backing and to make a statment over Gays wanting to make public sex in bathrooms legal. You know, common sense stuff everyone can agree is perfectly "normal" in such public places with complete strangers.

ya know stuff like that.

Do I think it is ridiculous?

Answer: Yes.

HOWEVER!

Do I think gays have it coming to em?

Answer: Not a doubt in my mind






[edit on 10-9-2009 by Stylez]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarknessFollows

Absolutely, what a wild and idiotic comparison! Two adults deciding to be together in whatever kind of relationship, is based on equality. But animals and children are forced, they don't choose to be involved in sexual relationships with adult humans. It is sick and it's damaging to them.
I have never understand the debat about permitting gays to get married, or why a man or woman shouldn't be able to have more than one spouse. If all adults agree, then who cares? Why should the state make such personal decisions? Obviously these laws are religion based, but isn't it time they should be re evaluated?


What an idiotic comparison? No, WRONG, YOU mean what an idiotic interpretation. READ THE POST!

Here is what you copy pasted




Two tax paying adults who both understand what they are getting into is vastly different than an adult and someone who thinks Spongebob lives in the TV. What's more it is really an insult to even compare the two! Pedophilia is the most disgusting abhorrent act that defies the larger Natural Law that the adult must protect the young. Having dealt with people who have been harmed in that manner I can tell you that it is vastly, vastly different. A child doesn't have a choice when a bigger person tries to force themselves upon them, nor do a lot of the animals that get wrangled into sickness.


Here is what your High fiving response was




Absolutely, what a wild and idiotic comparison! Two adults deciding to be together in whatever kind of relationship, is based on equality. But animals and children are forced, they don't choose to be involved in sexual relationships with adult humans. It is sick and it's damaging to them. I have never understand the debat about permitting gays to get married, or why a man or woman shouldn't be able to have more than one spouse. If all adults agree, then who cares? Why should the state make such personal decisions? Obviously these laws are religion based, but isn't it time they should be re evaluated?


Why should Government regulate such unions?

I think you just answered your own question, that many adults think sexual proclivities are how we as people should be defined.

Here is where this idea gets intentionally mis represented by my clever interlocutors using semantics yet again to confuse the issue.



Originally posted by Xtrozero Nice!

I just hope the Polygamist get to have as many partners as they want now, and the pedophiles get to lower the legal age of consent to 13, and let’s not leave out those who practice beastality.

Its all normal rght?


These are arguments that if Gays being married on the basis of their sexual orientation which are then protected by the equal rights ammendment, conventional wisdom follows those same arguments will be case law under the same premise for pedophiles also!

Your argument is then made moot when xtrozero says and i quote" Pedophiles lower the legal age consent laws" This isn't something he condones obviously and as sickened by it as you say you are, MY question would be, then why are so many in the gay lobby trying to do pass this very legislation? Why is NAMBLA members who are ALL gay, attempting to lower age of consent laws so they can have their man boy love.

It isn't pedastery or pedophilia when it isn't against the law hot shot and it isn't straight heterosexuals pushing this garbage, it is GAYS and persuading a child to have sex with them is something any child predator is very skilled at. Your indignation of this example tells me you ought to be as outraged by the oxymoron of same sex marriage for the very slippery slope this kind of mandate would create as anyone else.

NAMBLA members are just salavating over the idea Gays win this battle for one of the last signs and constructs of society just before that society dies. They are eager for gays to get this accomplished. Gays all say they revile the Nambal people, yet invite them to every Gay day parade they have. Do gays even BEGIN to think about thiese issues?

NO

They are too busy re-wording them and re-posting them in false misrepresentations implying more of the same basis for their basless accusations, "How dare you compare them to evil pedophiles! "

I can just as easily say, how dare they compare that which is between one man and one woman, to the same sex marriage oxymoron.

They not only mis- the point, but they make mine patent and true everytime I see them do it.

Your argument isn't with xtrozero pal, it is with the gay lobby the gay agenda and same sex marriage









[edit on 10-9-2009 by Stylez]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Religion is personal. "Your" religion has no business infringing on my life.

NO Religion in government - Period.


What about religous people anne? are they allowed according to your extremely intolerant ideas? The fact of the matter is anne, this country was started by religious people who made laws using a moral compass that never changes. The same one you say is used to "control" people.

You may argue it is not progressive and doesn't apply to our modern culture. That is the very reason we use it to find our way back to the truth and the truth is , stealing will never be progressive and it should be against the law, back then, today and a thousand years from now.

Murder should ALWAYS be a captal offense for those found guilty of it even a thousand years from now. How far have we deviated from the compass? mmmm 57 million babies needlessy executed for the crime of being born the result of those members of society saying gays should have equal rights while making asinine young age discrimination excuses for the not yet ready to leave the womb infants those same individuals are responisble for creating and want no accountability for their actions.

That isn't progressive, it's just plane murder.

So yes, anne, that is what the laws created using that moral compass are designed to do. It is done to maintain social discipline so society having such radical ideas as same sex marriage oxymorons, don't begin to erode the center of that moral compass making it more hard to define making it more subjective to what is right and what is wrong because you wouldn't believe how fast a society, once falling for the morals of the subjective modernist, will destroy that society in no time at all.

You see signs of it when you see teen preganacy rise and the solution is give them condums and abortion while critical of abstenance as if that is a dumb idea.

Ironically abstinance and good moral upbrining in the early century had worked far better than "cheating" methods of indulgent activity using get out of jail free methods of birth control, drugs for disease, and the ignorant laws to legitimize their benefactors like same sex marriage etc.




For all those who automatically choose to label me Atheist. I am a member of the "Center for Spiritual Living". Formerly Religious Science/Science of mind (not Christian Science - not Scientology). I was raised Christian - by choice I am not. I find it to be a man-made religion for political control.


I find your religion a man made one for mind control and offers many post modernist rhetorc to rationalize reasons to indulge in your every earthly desire, no matter who it tramples, and no matter how defenseless and innocent the victims who are executed because of it.




I hope the lawsuits result in gay marriage being declared legal by the supreme court.


and you also hope by proxy, pedophilia, pedastery, incest and and many other sexual abberant behaviors not easily discernable to coordinate with thier ergonomically matching gender, get thers legalized too.

This is why religion is every bit as deserving of being in government as secular or atheist's people's ideology. It keeps insane ideas rather than god from ever becoming a Government entitlement to people sharing those same ideas while expressing discrimination of religion in Government. You have religious people, yo uare going to have religiously biased politics. deal with it. Looking at the kind of radical ideas I have seen you support so far, Ill take a Christian over an atheist or secular humanist any day.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by Stylez]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by oneclickaway
Spoken with the true voice of the satanic 'christian'. And what is funny is that people with those rather ignorant and base thoughts of complete darkness and evil, believe they are 'saved' and will inhabit the kingdom of heaven. All I can do is feel pity really.


The ideas I report in my post are not those of satanic christians oneclick, they are of former gays and secular but straight men and woman who've used posts just like this one of yours to substantiate and justify giveing gays a taste of their own bigotry and hatred while showing them the difference between what gays assume to advance their agenda, and what they can count on as a self fulfilled prophesy a taste of their own medicine so the next time they want to impose their sexual agenda on family who have until very recently, been very supportive of them with the exception of marriage, are now going to show them what they are like when they DO hate Gays and are justified by posts just like yours.

Just go to some hometown meetings or PTA and family meetings by parents and you'll hear it too and if you don't lke it, they will say that is the point and that they don't care.

happy? Hope so



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Stylez
 



happy? Hope so


Happy? Nah...never happy at hate talk and incitement. Still, nothing to do with me. You will be accountable for your hatred, if not by the authorities then at your accounting before God. Good luck.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stylez

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts

So, it's in the works. If and when DOMA is struck down, it will then open the door to striking down anti-gay marriage laws in the remaining States.


Not here in my State it won't and from what I hear...


Let's deal with that statement in two parts. The entire rest of your post was just a never ending string of ad hominems and straw men, and completely irrelevant to the topic of the thread... Which is the law and the Constitution in regards to Gay Marriage, not your personal distain of homosexual behavior and lifestyles...

The first part, not in your State, is false. If the barring of such unions is found unconsitutional, your State will certainly be one of them... They all will, we are all subject to the Constitution! Your personal opinions withstanding...

Now on to the second part, from what you hear, the very definition of hearsay... You know, that thing you accused me of... Let's go back in time and look at what was said...

The 'conversation' began with this post from you...

Originally posted by Stylez
No one has told you to sit at the back of the bus Jaxon no one sees you hailing a cab and says Look gay to me and drives off unless you send some ques no one even knows. Gays are not discriminated against in the Job Market in fact they make more money than their hetero sexual counterpart, Gays are not turned away in the halls of academia, in fact they are more educated than their hetero counterpart. Gays date any race they want as many varieties they want a week that they want. So No, Your in correct.

To which I replied...

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
Back of the bus, no. Have I been nailed with a bottle in the head just for leaving a Gay Owned business? Yep! Got the scars from the fifteen stitches to prove it! And no, it wasn't a bar, it was a restaurant and in broad daylight! And there are many areas in this country where employment can be denied based solely on sexual preference.

Then it begins to get interesting..

Originally posted by Stylez
The argument was posed by Jaxon when he said he was hit by a bottle when coming out of a gay bar, someone I think it was driving by, threw a bottle hitting him in the head.

Jaxon thinks this is equivalent to the civil rights struggle Blacks in this country have. Hell, doesn’t even know who threw the bottle much less if they were a gay hating bigot, knew Jaxon was because he had is Gay Pride Tee shirt on emblazoned on a rainbow across his chest. For all he knows, it could have been a jealous ex-lover of someone Jason was seeing or any number of things.

Hmm, I seem to remember saying that it was a restaurant and broad daylight... Don't remember saying what I was wearing, and I don't even own a 'Gay Pride Tee shirt'... Also, notice that you are now refering to me in the third person... Sounds like you're now 'preaching' to the crowd... So I replied...

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
I was hit in the head with a bottle while coming out of a gay owned restaurant during lunch hours, and (pardon me mods) the ignorant coward that threw it screamed 'Die faggot' as he and his ignorant buddy drove away. As to what I was wearing, a black 'Blair Witch Project' tee shirt and jeans. By the way, it may have been gay owned, and in a gay section of town, but plenty of straight people eat there all the time.

See, bottle... Restaurant... lunch hours, so it must have been daylight... Same facts as in first post about this incident... Oh I add more details, so that's what makes it untrue, right???

Originally posted by Stylez
How'd he know you are gay Jaxon? Does the restaraunt have a sign saying Proprietor is gay? I don't recall the "die faggot part but the added embellishment still doesn't prove Gays are a suspect class. You need more than hearsay my friend and the other guy isn't here to defend himself so none of it matters to me as it wouldn't in court and YOU know it

Just wait, Ladies & Gentlemen, this gets even better...

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
The police report, the witnesses and the nasty little scar are more than hearsay

And the comeback...

Originally posted by Stylez
Now their is a police report and witnesses! Ha ha this hate crime gets more interesting all the time! But it still doesn't prove you're a suspect class and it is STILL hearsay Jaxon Roberts.

How about the Judgement? Was he convicted? I assume not because THAT is more compelling than a lousy police report so I'd assume you'd have mentioned it.

So, for there to be a crime, according to our armchair Lawyer, Stylez, you have to have a suspect, and that suspect must be convicted...

Sooooooooooo, I guess that means that since no one was ever convicted for the murders of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, they were never really murdered viciously... I guess that means that because they never caught 'D.B. Cooper', that the airliner was never highjacked and the money was never paid... I guess that means that the five known victims of the Zodiac Killer never really died... Do you even reread what you have written before you hit 'reply'? We can tell you don't reread the posts you are replying to, that's blatantly apparent!

This is a prime example of your 'debate', and I use the term loosely, style. Ad hominems, straw men and twisting of words... Smoke and mirrors... ATS isn't a pulpit, and no one is here to listen to a sermon...

[edit on 10-9-2009 by JaxonRoberts]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Some people are just truly delusional. How do they believe their own mind? It astounds me what comes out of their mouths.

Reminds me of my hubby's grandmother. She is Mormon (and yes they are also Christian).

No matter what you say to her - she has an answer. If not - its "if you had faith - you'd know". She takes no responsibility at all.

Animals? God put them on earth for human use.
Age of Earth: God used recycled older materials from another world.
Environment: No need to take care of it - God will provide.
Gays: She has gay friends. She has worked with gays. God says its wrong - so its wrong. End of story. That's it.

She'd support throwing virgins off a cliff into fire - if she was taught her God said to.

Personally - I have a brain and I am going to use it. Prejudice and Hate - - is pretty damn simple.

It is way past time for this country to declare "all 50 states must now recognize Gay marriage"



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by oneclickaway

Happy? Nah...never happy at hate talk and incitement. Still, nothing to do with me. You will be accountable for your hatred, if not by the authorities then at your accounting before God. Good luck.


The authorities? you mean cops? ha ha ha what? you think it is a hate crime what I tell you others have said? I sure would think it is a problem that everytime someone disagrees with me, it is because they hate me but don't flatter yourself so oneclick, neither you or jaxon roberts are worthy of that kind of time and energy. As for God, what would YOU know about God that he hasn't given explicit instructions on you can claim are under no such accountability for yourself.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Stylez
 



As for God, what would YOU know about God that he hasn't given explicit instructions on you can claim are under no such accountability for yourself.


Try as I might, that sentence makes no sense whatsoever to me. Are there missing words or something?



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
The entire rest of your post was just a never ending string of ad hominems and straw men, and completely irrelevant to the topic of the thread... Which is the law and the Constitution in regards to Gay Marriage, not your personal distain of homosexual behavior and lifestyles...


The usual banal and innane criticism using words you don't understand not withstanding, some examples with your explaining said straw man arguments would be fun to disect and watch you learn a thing or two.




Let's deal with that statement in two parts.


Not necessary, and you could have simply linked all those quotes to the entire post. The rainbow across the tee shirt wasn't stated as a fact Jax, it was stated as a guess, one of many I would presume and you presumed why the guy that hit you actually did hit you. You assume he knew you were gay cuz you were at a gay owned restaraunt. Did HE know that? Can yu prove it? NOPE!

You claim he said "Die Faggot", something he has not been given to reply or respond, so we have only your testimony and no other so you leave it up to us I assume to prove he didn't. Don't think it works that way.

all that other "stuff" you go into is made moot, null and void of any further consideration in spite of all your nit picking at posts where the minutia you think is central to your proving yourself superior is probably the most UN IMPORTANT waste of time you have put the readers through for the third time regardless if you are right or wrong about splitting hairs on details you added as you went along. and do you know why?

Because I am right that is why and we are left to YOUR strawman arguments and vivid speculation as to the REAL reasons you were hit in the head, if you were at all.

Their is no court that found him guilty and albeit unfortunate you got hit in the head with a bottle, a brick a blunt object who cares what the hell you think it was or what you think you can prove merely by repeating it over while insulting my posts for using ad-homs and strawman arguments, the bottom line is you got N-O-T-H-I-N-G.


No proof, No judgement no conviction no hate crime no oppression because you're gay and certainly no civil rights struggle within a billion miles of what Blacks had suffered through.

The fact is Jaxon roberts, we only know what you can prove and all you have proven is all I have been saying about gays thinking this is about Doma being anti gay. Doma wasn't created to be anti gay because it isn't about you or gays. It is about Marriage and DOMA is Pro Marriage.

It is nobodys business what kind of perverted sex people are into but gays have been forcing us to have to hear about it (embrace it) and

MOST OF US DON'T CARE, DON'T wanna know Period! It is offensive it is rude and it is obnoxious. Intrusion is intrusion and you can dress it up and color hate or bigotry all you want but changing the meaning of marriage isn't going to make them any less ashamed of themselves any more deserving of those benefits they greedily want to usurp from the family no more than changing the meaning of the word "gay" has made them any less sad. Yeah you remember, it used to mean "happy" Now what does it conjure up when you hear that word?

Now you know why we don't want them doing the same thing to marriage because in the end, it's all about homosexuals. They ought to call the gay lobby " I, ME, MY," incorporated, they are that self centered.

maybe THAT is why you got hit in the head with a bottle eh?


[edit on 10-9-2009 by Stylez]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by oneclickaway

Try as I might, that sentence makes no sense whatsoever to me. Are there missing words or something?


I wouldn't think it would, when you still think marriage is an equal rights argument and gay means species of specially protected humans who can't be known without mention they have sex between same sex partners.

Not when you believe marriage means a sexual oriented union between any number of creatures and various sexual perversions deserving of Government Backed Bennies and perks and any other definition comes from homophobic haters and bigots.

No I don't suspect you would understand but that isn't my fault,.

[edit on 10-9-2009 by Stylez]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Stylez
 




I wouldn't think it would, when you still think marriage is an equal rights argument and gay means species of specially protected humans who can't be known without mention they have sex between same sex partners.

Not when you believe marriage means a sexual oriented union between any number of creatures and various sexual perversions deserving of Government Backed Bennies and perks and any other definition comes from homophobic haters and bigots.

No I don't suspect you would understand but that isn't my fault,.


No, you misunderstand. Your sentence below makes no sense to me, not because of any beliefs that you erroneously attribute to me but because of either missing words, or lack of punctuation and grammar. It seems to be just a jumble of words. That is why it makes no sense. Not that I should expect it to really.



As for God, what would YOU know about God that he hasn't given explicit instructions on you can claim are under no such accountability for yourself.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 02:09 AM
link   


TextWhat an idiotic comparison? No, WRONG, YOU mean what an idiotic interpretation. READ THE POST!

Clearly you and I interprate this in a completely different way.




TextYour argument is then made moot when xtrozero says and i quote" Pedophiles lower the legal age consent laws" This isn't something he condones obviously and as sickened by it as you say you are, MY question would be, then why are so many in the gay lobby trying to do pass this very legislation? Why is NAMBLA members who are ALL gay, attempting to lower age of consent laws so they can have their man boy love.

So now it's the gay guys who are secretly all pedophiles and they are trying to lower the age consent laws so they can screw young kids legally..... that is basically what you're trying to say here, right?
You have some really weird ideas about gays. To me, it seems to be homofobic. I have never heard such nonsense in my life. Maybe it's about time you get laid and loose some hormones.





top topics
 
29
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join