Like it or not, all 50 States must now recognize Gay Marriages!, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 28 times


reply posted on 1-9-2009 @ 10:22 PM by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


OK, that post made me laugh! I've been married, so I know better than to make that mistake twice. But you forgot that those who chose to will also have the right to be their mates next of kin when something bad happens, they will have the right to inherit their mates estate when they die, they will have the right to... You get the point!


I can appreciate your sentiments, as I am all for gay rights. No person’s sexuality engaged in consensual relationships with emotionally healthy adults should ever be questioned by others in my humble opinion.

I realize the unexpected in life happens sometimes for those cases were there wasn’t a will made up before an untimely or unexpected passing, but even as a heterosexual I can more or less stipulate a next of kin in a legally binding contract of my choosing as well as give anyone I stipulate limited or full Power of Attorney on my behalf.

I can appreciate aspects like Social Security Death Benefits as being a valid reason for gays to seek legal marriage.
I can appreciate the desire for legitimacy in the eyes of the law, yet both our current President and former President here in the United States are and were respectively considered to still be illegitimate by some based on how an individual wants to interpret the law or disagree with the law.

Ultimately validation in life really only comes when you agree with and condone how you are living your life, regardless of what others might say or think.

This is a conspiracy website by the way and I point that out because the actual marriage laws as they apply to heterosexuals have some sinister aspects to them when you examine how and why the corporate government began licensing marriages in the first place.

I don’t advocate the current legal institution of marriage in its present form for anyone regardless of their sexual orientation.

You are right that some legal privileges and protections are afforded by it, but so are many more legal obligations and burdens. I personally don’t believe the former outweigh the latter in any circumstance though I do concur people of all sexual orientations should have the right to enter in to a legal union if they be so inclined.

I just personally advise against a legal union to anyone and everyone if they be so inclined! Take a Vegas vacation hire an escort, get inebriated, see a good mental health specialist, get some electric shock treatments but don’t get married!


reply posted on 1-9-2009 @ 10:30 PM by schrodingers dog
Originally posted by John Matrix

It's not the fear of change, it's the fear of the disease it spreads, fear for our childrens safety, fear this paraphilic lifestyle is going to get rammed down our childrens throats, etc. Those are legitimate fears and concerns.


Please, enough with the hysterical "oh will somebody think of the children" disinfo.

The DSM provides clinical criteria for these paraphilias:

Exhibitionism: the recurrent urge or behavior to expose one's genitals to an unsuspecting person. (Can also be the recurrent urge or behavior to perform sexual acts in a public place, or in view of unsuspecting persons.)

Fetishism: the use of inanimate objects to gain sexual excitement. Partialism refers to fetishes specifically involving nonsexual parts of the body.

Frotteurism: the recurrent urges of behavior of touching or rubbing against a nonconsenting person.

Paedophilia: a psychological disorder in which an adult experiences a sexual preference for prepubescent children,[22] or has engaged in child sexual abuse.[23][24][25]

Sexual Masochism: the recurrent urge or behavior of wanting to be humiliated, beaten, bound, or otherwise made to suffer for sexual pleasure.

Sexual Sadism: the recurrent urge or behavior involving acts in which the pain or humiliation of a person is sexually exciting.

Transvestic fetishism: arousal from "clothing associated with members of the opposite sex."[6][26]

Voyeurism: the recurrent urge or behavior to observe an unsuspecting person who is naked, disrobing or engaging in sexual activities, or activities which may not be sexual in nature at all. *


Not that the DSM is the ultimate authority mind you, but if they exclude homosexuality, perhaps you should consider relinquishing this disingenuous "slippery slope" argument.


reply posted on 1-9-2009 @ 10:31 PM by stevegmu
Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
reply to post by stevegmu


Your whole argument is moot because state law can not supersede federal law.


Hmmm.

Federal law states marijuana is illegal, and yet we have states legalizing marijuana.

Federal law states people crossing the international border into the U.S. without permission is illegal, and yet we have sanctuary cities.



The state law decriminalizing marijuana in states like California doesn't hold up in federal court. The DEA still gets convictions.
It is not the responsibility of the states to enforce federal immigration laws.


reply posted on 1-9-2009 @ 10:47 PM by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by John Matrix


If you are going to state that something is a fact, then SOURCE it!!! Otherwise, it's just your opinion, and thus hearsay! This is ATS, the online equivalent of Missouri, it's the SHOW ME SITE!

And personal or general, it was snarky, and you know it! Don't expect respect when you are disrespectful, whether in general, or directly.



reply posted on 1-9-2009 @ 10:51 PM by John Matrix
Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by John Matrix


If you are going to state that something is a fact, then SOURCE it!!! Otherwise, it's just your opinion, and thus hearsay! This is ATS, the online equivalent of Missouri, it's the SHOW ME SITE!

And personal or general, it was snarky, and you know it! Don't expect respect when you are disrespectful, whether in general, or directly.


Are you saying you require proof that anal sex causes hemorrhoids? You must be joking. If you want to prove my facts as being wrong, go ahead, be my guest. But don't start barking orders at me pal. Do your own research. If you were not so snarky and sniping at me I would have given you some research and background info.


reply posted on 1-9-2009 @ 10:53 PM by schrodingers dog
reply to post by John Matrix


Myth: Anal sex can create hemorrhoids

Anal sex does not create hemorrhoids, although it can certainly irritate existing ones. *




Argh ... you made me break my word.

[edit on 1 Sep 2009 by schrodingers dog]


reply posted on 1-9-2009 @ 11:02 PM by John Matrix
Originally posted by schrodingers dog
reply to post by John Matrix


Myth: Anal sex can create hemorrhoids

Anal sex does not create hemorrhoids, although it can certainly irritate existing ones. *




Argh ... you made me break my word.

[edit on 1 Sep 2009 by schrodingers dog]


Do you think I would say it without knowing what I am talking about? Yep...you think I am that stupid....and that my friend is disrespectful....click here and read number 10 for yourself. www.hemroidshemorrhoids.com...

Numnber 10 from that page reads as follows:

Anal sex is another cause of hemorrhoids. No matter how much lubricant it’s used; keep in mind that the anus wasn’t designed for this function. If we remember that just wiping the area with toilet paper is considered a risk, you will get the picture yourself of how much problems can cause this type of sexual intercourse.

I know it's off topic, but I was asked for a source, so there it is. Next time you or Jaxon Roberts doubts me, think twice so you don't end up looking stupid.


[edit on 1/9/09 by John Matrix]

[edit on 1/9/09 by John Matrix]


reply posted on 1-9-2009 @ 11:04 PM by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by John Matrix


snark·y (snär'kē)
adj. snark·i·er, snark·i·est Slang

1. Rudely sarcastic or disrespectful; snide.
Source. (You should try this sometime!)

Having an opinion does not qualify as 'snarky', it is the expression of such opinion that can be. Since I have yet to read a post of yours that was not both insulting and offensive (and I have yet to see you ever source anything) I'll wear that like a badge of honor! And if you find me to be so, feel free to click the 'ignore' link below my avatar!
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Alaska: Samantha Koenig Kidnapped last week.
  Posted 2 days ago with 111 member flags
Blue Spheres Fall from the Sky in the UK
  Posted 15 days ago with 81 member flags
The Chinese have seen the dragon in the sky !!
  Posted 2 days ago with 68 member flags
Strange Sounds in Sky Explained by Scientists
  Posted 11 days ago with 59 member flags
She Dialed 911. The Cop Who Came to Help Raped Her.
  Posted 4 days ago with 49 member flags
Anonymous: Revealing The Arcane Legal Trick Behind ACTA
  Posted 11 days ago with 42 member flags
Anonymous reveals Haditha massacre emails | RT
  Posted 7 days ago with 33 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous hacks CIA
  Breaking Alternative News, Posted 15 hours ago, 113 replies
Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 11 hours ago, 96 replies
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 10 hours ago, 63 replies
Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 6 hours ago, 58 replies
Free will
  Philosophy and Metaphysics, Posted 13 hours ago, 50 replies