Homosexuals were warned this would happen

Some of the studies touted by them (before 2004 when I viewed some of them) claimed they were better off, less violent, but that is still not an argument for acceptance of tyranny. The idea that they were less violent prone leads to an anthropological explanation for how a tribe in the crossroads of civilization needing procreation for sword arms (before they had a king or standing army) would view homosexuality as an abomination based upon purely secular logic and not an edict from a god. The standing army and the phalanx does in a way accept nut to butt.

My argument for same-sex marriage is based upon religious beliefs that it is better to marry than burn in lust spreading a fruit-loop virus, but even that argument has to fight the logic of Darwinian calipers with the religious compassion to not destroy the (potential) mutation as an option in womb…abortion or with spicing. http://healthland.time.com/2012/12/13/new-insight-into-the-epigenetic-roots-of-homosexuality/

Atheist parents might want grandchildren, so keep any future tests out of their hands or homosexuals might get aborted, as the “it” must have equal protection of the laws to be born functional (seed makes zygote if it goes in egg not poop).

Not every culture against homosexuality based it upon religious beliefs, real Roman citizens do the penetrating and the effeminate slaves the receiving, and what created the religion?

If you don’t believe in gods, it must have been a “liberal” atheist on their ancient Platonic Philosopher Kingly Supreme Court arguing that equal protections of the laws can’t exist for the child of the city-state so inclined to accept Gay parents (as replacements for natural seed and egg parents) if they don’t have representatives of seed and egg parents (a family) like nature intended before mutation.

Every child has an equal right to protection of the laws to have seed and egg parents, and as the parts were intended to be able to produce offspring as normal seed and egg parents.

Oh, darn, that atheist argument might be used without an amendment, to impose upon the city-states, by some future Supreme Tyranny, and religion need not apply. You think you have it made, liberals are here to stay, but when religion is gone there are still calipers. Calipers are cold, and they won’t care what your new Gay religion says about acceptance of the dysfunctional, calipers want little functional calipers that don’t squirt seed on doodoo but penetrates an egg like the stuff was made to work.

In the past I made it perfectly clear that I was for doing these things at the state level until enough states existed for a constitutional amendment. Bypassing the constitution has made me your political enemy, religion has nothing to do with it. It was a religious guy (JMayo, Daytona Beach Message Board, which closed down in 2004) who argued with me to support such marriage, and like I said blind BIGOT I voted against the amendment in Florida. Thing is though, I supported it even when I argued against him, because he argued your route.

Even before I supported it, years before, John a Gay from Albuquerque, New Mexico, drove me to the airport from Point Mugu, for my final leave from the Navy, in the back seat was his totally hot blonde lesbian “seat cover,” who I actually went on a date with once (with a straight girl for sure, in the front seat, Lesbian in the back), and we thought he was “Don Juan.” Now wasn’t that nice of him? To out or not to out, that is the question; they were not outed by this horrible religious bigot; I saw the USS Norton Sound, when it was news, Google it. My Lesbian drinking buddy kind of looked the part, like a truck driver.

Now, religion, prompted me to advocate quarantine of the GRIDs, when there were only a few, but all you saw was religion, not logic, and I remember the yelling and screaming against closing the bathhouses; how did that work out for you? Did you enjoy the video of the flight attendant on the New York to San Francisco route with GRID who said he wasn’t going to stop going to the bathhouses? Marriage is a quarantine, you can find it in religion as an answer to a plague that killed about 30,000, but all a BIGOT like you sees is religion not logic.

You have used no religious beliefs to promote tyranny, or to bypass the constitution, yet your bigotry exists and so does your tyranny.

“While the Constitution contemplates that democracy is the appropriate process for change, individuals who are harmed need not await legislative action before asserting a fundamental right.”

The Constitution doesn’t contemplate, it exists, by the people, it is a tyranny that has contemplated how to destroy what it says, and what we the people voted for when we amended it, and your form of tyranny is a threat in several potential scenarios unrelated to this issue.

 

In what way are gay rights more "righteous?" We've had our day in court just like every other marginalized group.

 

You should use twitter.

 

Could you tell me the EXACT DATES of when everyone on earth was totally moral and never did anything wrong? I missed this in the history books...

 

Why? Is it full of mumbo jumbo words that say nothing also?

 

I wonder if those who blame gay marriage for psychopathic men screwing their daughters are just looking for an excuse..... a scapegoat...???????

 

no

if you make claims that one is born with one specific sexual deviancy, then the argument works for all. And if you demand special considerations for 1 specific sexual deviancy, then all must receive them as well

Your argument that you were "born that way" must also be extended to pedophiles, necrophiles as well as incestuous relationships

we cannot punish anyone for "how they were born"; can we?

- - - Updated - - -

why do homosexuals who without any medical proof, claim that they were born that way refuse to treat pedophiles how homosexuals want to be treated?

It's just a different type of sexual deviancy

 

Yours is an asinine argument for simple reason. Consent.

Homosexuals of legal age can give consent to each other for there actions. Pedophiles are by definition unable to receive consent from their victims.

Your pathetic attempts to link consensual homosexual sex with predatory crimes is noted.

 

Sexuality is such an open medium; I think people frequently become freaked out by it because it has such an attractive allure, and is obviously iconic of one's most intimate self. Mother nature produces all kinds of different types of human beings; homosexuality is natural, just as autism, heterosexuality, tall men, short men, white men, and black men. Homosexuality will happen regardless; making it illegal or oppressed only forces homosexuals to live secret, immoral lifestyles more readily—with countless casualties; embracing homoerotic unions and calling it marriage is a matter of equality, and sustaining a vibrant, healthy, rich society of human-beings who are utilizing their sexualities in a moral, committed, safe way for the production of spiritual convergence. That is, a relationship between members of the opposite sex may allow them to produce offspring, while homosexuals tend to have an innate, inner need to breed & reproduce artistically. In this sense, the spiritual convergence between homosexuals is highly productive to society.

Where society begins to unravel is when love & productivity are automatically considered synonymous with uselessness; every relationship & union has the capacity to reproduce. A business contract (a marriage) can reproduce fractals of corporations & companies that absolutely invigorate society; a heterosexual union contributes to the corporation of childbearing. A homosexual union contributes to the corporation of storytelling, and their sexual attraction is an ecstatic token (reward) that merges to improve the quality of their relations. I mean, really, we need to analyze the benefits of unions & sexuality to see how they can actually produce a consensual, augmented reality.

In a sense, obsessing over heterosexuality as God's only productive form of union is a disastrous strategy; equating something so physical as childbearing to be the only productive use of lifelong love & sexual attractions is actually a very atheistic perspective, and quite an immoral practice. Perversion is where full-fledged sexual agreements become novelty, deceptive, broken (weak, experimental, or false commitments), and so-on. There will always be couples we don't agree with; but to blame the deterioration of sexuality on homosexuals getting married is inept at best, and a prostitution of the soul in its essence.

 

The old testament mentions homosexuality and cross dressing. That must be around 2,500 years ago.

 

and that is your version of morality showing. If one is "born homosexual" as you claim you are, despite no medical proof of that claim, then the same latitude must be given to all of the other sexual deviancies.Your activists cited the 14th Amendment and so too can every other sexual deviant.

It's not we folks with grounded morality who created the slippery slope. Just because "you got yours" is no reason to deny a "born necrophile" their 14th A rights to bang dead bodies

 

Apparently you have a problem understanding how sexual relationships between consenting adults differs from sexual relationships with minors or others who cannot consent, but given the history of the Catholic Church on this subject, I'm not really surprised.

 

Again, public opinion shifts

We've seen one sexual deviancy pushed forth to be akin to how one is born and the same is now happening with cross-dressers.

It's only time before pedophilia and necrophilia are given special accords. That is the slippery slope when you deem a sexual deviancy as how one is born and thus should not be stigmatized.

You can try and sound self-righteous but this is what a God-less, progressive society gets you.

 

Completely asinine post.

I'm not gay and have never claimed to be "born" so.

The 14th applied to same sex marriage whether a gay person was "born" the that way or chose to live that lifestyle - it also applies
to heterosexual people who "chose" to marry a same sex partner. Same sex marriage applies equally to ALL American citizens able to
give consent. Since ALL American citizens are legally prevented from forcing children into having sex, there is NO conflict with the 14th. Children and dead people CAN NOT give consent - end of story.

If it is your desire to rape little kids or dead people, as you seem obsessed with the topic - you are welcome to spend the same time and
money gay American citizens had to in order to get their case to the Supreme Court. Your "slippery slope" argument is asinine.

 

Twitting is all about the foolish desire to respond to nothing, that is what twits do.

Example Twit:

I'm grouchy, it is either the sandspur in my underwear or a dangleberry.

 

I see that I hit a nerve with you. The slippery slope was created by the sexual deviants and those who support the deviant sexual lifestyles.

Since there is absolutley no medical proof that one is "born homosexual" yet they are treated a ssuch, then the same consideration must also be given to every single other sexual deviancy. The slippery slope exists and the only way to accellerate it is to demonize Christians and elect Democrats.

As a person of strong moral convictions and faith, I see with clear vision the moral decay of society and it began with attempts to normalize gay-sex. The next agenda is the cross-dressers and we already see that happening in several states. Pedophiles and necrophiles are waiting their turn

 

Wow. You've been enlightened. I agree, most all are born that way. Afterall, one doesn't just choose to be attracted to young children etc.
But acting on that is a crime. Acting on being gay with another consensual adult, is not.

But if you are so concerned about the treatment of pedophiles, I'm sure they'd be happy for you to go and try to change the laws. Even though I think they are born that way, I won't go backing them legally. Afterall, I'm not Catholic.

 

Just don't tell anyone you're banging dead bodies.

 

so despite no medical proof to the fable of "born homosexual", the govt has granted you special privileges. Now, you don't want to do the same for the other sexual deviants. Can you spell hypocrisy?

 

but you told we the 96.4% that you didn't want to go back into the closet and should be able to tell everyone that you have gay sex and should be given special accords. Now when it comes to necrophiles, you want them in the closet. Why is only your sexual deviancy deserving of special treatment but not the others?

I don't think any sexual deviancy should be given any "rights" but you sure support your "gay rights"

 

Convince me. As a hetero male, I've always had special privileges.
But I'm not catholic, so why on earth would I be for pedophilia. But as I said, make your case, but it has to be better than what you presented.
Hey, you live a adulterous life style and I don't call you a sexual deviant, even though many of them are.

 

I haven't told anyone anything. Why you feel the need to lie is beyond me.
I guess when all else fails, lie? I guess it's some peoples ways of showing they've lost the argument.

As I said, I don't care about your sexual deviant actions so why should I care about anyone else's. Only hypocrites care about others sexual activity while committing their own deviant acts.
As I said earlier, go and bang all the dead people you want. No skin off my back.

 

ahh forgive me, you are one of the homosexuals who denies it on this forum. I will play along

first, heterosexual males have no special privileges compared with homosexual males. If you were a heterosexual then you would know that.

We all must be the same age to drive, drink, enter the military, be considered an adult etc.

When it comes to affirmative action type rules, the heterosexuals are left in the cold. A heterosexual cannot ask the govt to suspend the 1st Amendment rights of a Christian but a homosexual can and the govt will acquiesce to the homsoexual.

 

I don't see how lying makes your case. In fact, it's a sign of having lost the argument.

Sure we have. It has never be illegal to be a hetero. It used to be illegal to be gay. An honest person would know this. So another loss for you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States
Even 13 yrs ago it was illegal in some states. I bet they still are, they just can't enforce them any more.

Nope lost again. Driving ages vary from state to state.

Back to lying to prove a point? I don't think anyone buys these lies.

 

hey wait, are you saying that the age to drive in one state is different if you like heterosexual sex versus gay-sex?

Oops, you did that to yourself

So again I say, heterosexuals have no additional rights over homosexuals. On the other hand, if you claim to have gay-sex, you can ask the govt to suspend the 1st Amendment rights of a Christian and the govt will do that.

This issue that you and the other homosexuals have is that I state facts. Just because you don't like my choice of words is of no consequence to me

There is no medical test to prove that one is "born homosexual" (or any other sexual deviancy) so that brings it down to the sexual act.

In other words, simply claiming that you engage in gay-sex is enough to demand the suspension of rights of other citizens