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

reply to post by John Matrix


Yes, if you are going to state it, especially claiming it is a 'fact', then do what all the quality members here do, and SOURCE it!

reply to post by John Matrix


See, that wasn't so hard, now was it. And I never disputed what you said, just how you said it! It is possible to state a position or fact without being nasty about it. As the Mods like to say, "disagree without being disagreeable".

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
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!

The above opinion demonstrates why you are not an expert on John Matrix. I just gave you a source(see above post with link to source). I have posted MANY comments and linked to MANY videos and web pages since joining ATS.

Now please get off your high horse and get the thread back on track instead of attacking me like this. Surely you have better things to do than banter and throw verbal grenades at me.

Looks like America is the next Babylon/Sodom.

Of course, I knew it would get this way. Satan has deceived so many people. He sure hates us. Yet people take his bait. Sad. Very sad indeed!!!

reply to post by John Matrix


I do, and that post was in response to a post of yours before you finally posted a source. I did check out your source, and since it's a blog by a med student, I'll stick with SD's source, which is in conflict with yours.

Now while you may post sources on other topics, you seem to neglect this when you post on Gay oriented threads, which is the only place I seem to see you.

Last 'verbal grenade', I promise.

Originally posted by John Matrix

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.

Gee, that's nice ...

I guess I'm not smart enough to source a med student's blog.

Believe whatever you want JM.

[edit on 1 Sep 2009 by schrodingers dog]

Just another reason why america should be burnt to the ground! What next pedo's marrying 5 year old girls!Or women marrying donkey's!

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by John Matrix

 

Yes, if you are going to state it, especially claiming it is a 'fact', then do what all the quality members here do, and SOURCE it!

Ever hear the expression...."some things go without saying".

If I thought that what I was saying was not common knowledge, then I would have SOURCED it! Perhaps health issues is not your strongest area....but ya learned something today anyway....and from a simpleton.

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

Ohhhhh! Cat fight!

Thanks for making me laugh, I seriously was getting P.O'ed at this thread. The point is about legality of the marriage in other states. I do have to say, just because Vermont passes it, it's NOT automatically legal in my great state of Oklahoma. All anyone has to do is look at driving laws. In Oklahoma, you can have a truck with a lift kit. You can have one in Missouri too. In Oklahoma, the tailgate can only be as high as the chest of the officer stopping you (not very accurate I know...we're rednecks ) In Missouri, there is a specific inch height of the back bumper. Now, if I take my too tall truck in to Missouri, I CAN and WILL be ticketed because I am in violation of Missouri road laws, BUT if my truck is registered in Oklahoma, where it IS legal, they CAN NOT make me take the lift off, or tow my truck to be impounded. Thats where the Each State to Honor all others clause comes in.

Now, if you got married in Vermont, and then moved to Oklahoma, when your VT citizenship expired, the State of Oklahoma, (as you are now citizens of) would NOT recognize the marriage any longer, and you would be entitled to no tax breaks, or other marital benefits from the state.

That is why to me, state laws should have no bearing on marriage.

To everyone else who is getting their panties in a bunch, calm down. You don't like homosexuality, don't practice it. Also, to the homosexuals, you don't want to be persecuted for your practices, don't flaunt them. To me, I don't have homosexual friends. I have some female friends who like to have sex with other females. They keep it in the bedroom. Just like my male friends who like to have sex with other males. They keep it in the bedroom. Like me and my girlfriend, our sexuality is kept in the bedroom.

Homo's, if you're in public, don't flame. And Hetero's if you're in public, don't testosterone out. Respect each other, get along, and live together.

Peace

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
I guess I'm not smart enough to source a med student's blog.

Believe whatever you want JM.

It's not a matter of believing what I want. It's a mater of believing the reality of the causes. That was no med students blog. Belittle the source all you want but it changes nothing. I have several dozen more sources. Here is another.
www.hemroidshelp.com...


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

I totally believe in equality, gays are equal to everyone else. I have absolutely no problem with homosexuals whatsoever.

That being said, I think it's silly for them to demand the government justify their relationship by "letting them" get "married". I don't think that's something the government should have any part in. I don't understand why anyone thinks the government has to approve their union and give them a "license". It just seems ridiculous to me.

I consider myself married. I don't have a ring. I've never had a wedding. I sure as [expletive] don't have a "license", nor do I need one.

IMO, if two people (gay or straight) both agree they're married, they are. That's all it takes. Trying to get the government to allow you to do something like that is giving them far more credit (and power) than they deserve.

But hey, some people think differently. If it's important to them that the government approves of their union, I hope they get what they want. I just think their right to be married is inherent. I mean, "marriage licenses" have only been around for maybe 70 years or so in America, if I'm not mistaken.

More power to them, if they really want the government in their business.

reply to post by midnightbrigade


Good post. I would not disagree with anything you have said. And I too have a few friends that are bi and/or gay....they don't talk about it, or flaunt their sex practices in any one's face, they keep it in the bedroom.

As for gay marriage, it does not bother me one way or the other. But I don't think marriage is the answer to anything. Live together, make your vows, promises, and commitments to each other, but marriage just provides more work for family law lawyers, court staff, and social workers.
The tax benefits will seem minuscule compared to the lawyers bills...

Originally posted by midnightbrigade
Now, if you got married in Vermont, and then moved to Oklahoma, when your VT citizenship expired, the State of Oklahoma, (as you are now citizens of) would NOT recognize the marriage any longer, and you would be entitled to no tax breaks, or other marital benefits from the state.

So, if you are a heterosexual couple who gets married in Vermont, and you move to Oklahoma, when you VT citizenship expires, you have to get married again? Your VT marriage is null and void??? Just wondering...

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by John Matrix

 

I do, and that post was in response to a post of yours before you finally posted a source. I did check out your source, and since it's a blog by a med student, I'll stick with SD's source, which is in conflict with yours.

Now while you may post sources on other topics, you seem to neglect this when you post on Gay oriented threads, which is the only place I seem to see you.

Last 'verbal grenade', I promise.

rrrrr....what blog? Nothing on that page indicates it's a blog, but I posted another source above. It took me 5 seconds to google it with a question to get the anwer and I got 72 pages.

It's a fact that the vast majority of the pages link to medical sites which agree with what I said. Shall I begin posting them a few links at a time per post to SOURCE it and PROVE it? I have lot's of time if you do.

[edit on 2/9/09 by John Matrix]

Originally posted by John Matrix
reply to post by midnightbrigade

 

Good post. I would not disagree with anything you have said. And I too have a few friends that are bi and/or gay....they don't talk about it, or flaunt their sex practices in any one's face, they keep it in the bedroom.

Don't fall over, but I agree with you 100%! It shows a lack of class to do otherwise!

As for gay marriage, it does not bother me one way or the other. But I don't think marriage is the answer to anything. Live together, make your vows, promises, and commitments to each other, but marriage just provides more work for family law lawyers, court staff, and social workers.
The tax benefits will seem minuscule compared to the lawyers bills...

Could provide a boost to the ecomomy, couldn't it? Then there's the wedding itself! Expensive little buggers! Think of it as a 'Gay Stimulus Package'!

reply to post by John Matrix


I would have to say that your second source was better than your first, and makes sense to me. However, that said, both sources state:

Straining during passing stool on toilet is now regarded as one of the main hemroids causes.

I would also add that vaginal sex is the cause of HPV in women, which is far more serious (I know because my daughter has it) and cannot be treated with good ole Preparation H! Let's face it, sex is a crap shoot no matter what type it is!

But this is neither here nor there in regards to the topic at hand, which has very little to do with sex, but instead has to do with relationships and the law.

[edit on 2-9-2009 by JaxonRoberts]

reply to post by John Matrix


Hello John Matrix, I've noticed you are very concerned about mens butts and their hemroids. You have an extream dislike for homosexual men as well. Is there anything you aren't telling us that you want to share? We will show compassion if there is.

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts

Originally posted by midnightbrigade
Now, if you got married in Vermont, and then moved to Oklahoma, when your VT citizenship expired, the State of Oklahoma, (as you are now citizens of) would NOT recognize the marriage any longer, and you would be entitled to no tax breaks, or other marital benefits from the state.

So, if you are a heterosexual couple who gets married in Vermont, and you move to Oklahoma, when you VT citizenship expires, you have to get married again? Your VT marriage is null and void??? Just wondering...

I see your point, but no since heterosexual marriages are accepted in both states. Now, if Oklahoma was REAL backward and didn't allow hetero marriages too? Same rule would apply. Oh, and the "gay stimulus package" cracked me up!

How can this be??...

Well outlawing gay marriage doesnt stop gay couples from living long and happy lives together.

This changing legal environment just ends the prohibition imposed on those that prefer to live outside of the old archaic laws.


It is about time.








[edit on 2-9-2009 by smirkley]

reply to post by JaxonRoberts

I would have to say that your second source was better than your first, and makes sense to me. However, that said, both sources state:


Straining during passing stool on toilet is now regarded as one of the main hemroids causes.

A yogurt smoothie or cup of yogurt a day will completely eliminate this in most cases, the active cultures are great for aiding in your digestion and making evacuations the evny of all those who survived the titanic.

Those still suffering should use a mixture of apple cider vinegar and a little hot water in a rectal syringe every so often and their problems will likely completely dissapear.

Just because Heterosexuals like John have no fetishes doesn't mean I don't have a couple hundred!