Homosexual love

The laws of the state will always outweigh any power of attorney or other written document that conflicts with such laws. MM, you better check with an attorney, because I think you are spouting nonsense.

My power of attorney documents are written and notarized. My attorney has confirmed that they are ironclad, so I really don't care what you "think". If you live in a state that doesn't allow such actions, I suggest you move.


You are wrong. If that is the advice your attorney is giving you, you need another attorney. Wills are successfully challenged all the time. All the time.
It's not a will, it's a POA, two different things.
I'm not wrong, but you are an idiot. Perhaps you can't afford an attorney, if that is the case, I suggest you visit LegalZoom: Online Legal Document Services: LLC,Wills,Incorporation,Divorce & More it's a step in the right direction.
 
Yep, we're backward in some things.

Never could figure out why people think that not allowing homos to marry is somehow backwards?

Seems to me, that legalizing the homos animalistic behavior is going backwards.
I would rather see homos married to each other than homos pretending to be something they aren't and marrying people they pretend to be happy with for the sake of traditional marriage.
 
Just getting married is not "proof" of love.
Let me point out that some women like anal sex. If they can't get it at home.....

The Bass wouldn't marry a woman he didn't love, neither would his wife marry a man she didn't love so your point is moot.

What does anal sex have to do with "love"? If she can't get it at home....


Speak for yourself and your want for anal sex.
 
A phobia is not restricted to "fear." In the general sense it simply means having an irrational objection.


So a heterosexual rejecting acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle and gay sex acts is irrational and to be rational is to accept it?



It is not irrational for a heterosexual to reject acceptance of a homosexual lifestyle just like it is not irrational for a homosexual to reject acceptance of a heterosexual lifestyle. However, we are not talking about one group or person forcing others into a submissive role of sexual orientation.

It is wholly irrational to give one set of Citizens Marriage Rights while simultaneously denying those same Rights to a different group based on what is between their legs. That is the crux of homophobia: it is an irrational objection. This is why homophobic camps re-write the Bible to fit their agendas, why they claim marriage has always had one definition, that gay marriage would destroy society, and that giving gays equal rights somehow forces homosexuality onto everyone else.

There is not a single valid, logical, or rational objection to affording gays equal rights.
 
calling them faggots makes you homophobe

The word homophobe makes me laugh.

It implies that someone is afraid of homos.

What's there to be scared of?

As long as you don't touch one or breathe the same air.

You shouldn't catch any of their diseases or infections.


The same as not wanting to touch a turd.

It doesn't make you a turdophobe.

Just means you have enough sense to stay away from nasty smelly things :doubt:


A phobia is not restricted to "fear." In the general sense it simply means having an irrational objection.

I think it's highly rational to think that watching two guys with Harry Reams mustaches swapping spit in public causes the gag reflex in most people....not "Oh isn't that romantic".
 
A phobia is not restricted to "fear." In the general sense it simply means having an irrational objection.

If a neighbor"s dog left a gift on my lawn.

How is my not liking it an irrational objection?

A turd on my lawn would be no different than a homo moving in next door.

Both are nasty and would bring down my property value. :evil:


How silly of me. Now I can clearly see the logical genius of comparing a human being to a turd. I am forever indebted!
 
There is not a single valid, logical, or rational objection to affording gays equal rights.

Every culture or society that has allowed homosexualty has ended up in the trash can of history.

Actually, western cultures tended to fall when taken over by ignorant and dangerous Christians. Examples are "the Dark Ages" and the "Inquisition". Then of course, there were the Muslims destroying culture after culture and their beliefs are shared with the Christians.

Republicans can't just "say" something and that makes it true. If that were the case, "mysticism" and the "occult" would be "real" and "Noah's Ark" would be a historical event and not just a "Children's Fable".
 
The word homophobe makes me laugh.

It implies that someone is afraid of homos.

What's there to be scared of?

As long as you don't touch one or breathe the same air.

You shouldn't catch any of their diseases or infections.


The same as not wanting to touch a turd.

It doesn't make you a turdophobe.

Just means you have enough sense to stay away from nasty smelly things :doubt:


A phobia is not restricted to "fear." In the general sense it simply means having an irrational objection.

I think it's highly rational to think that watching two guys with Harry Reams mustaches swapping spit in public causes the gag reflex in most people....not "Oh isn't that romantic".

Actually, anybody "swapping spit" in public is gross. Unless you're a voyeur. Are you a voyeur?
 
There is not a single valid, logical, or rational objection to affording gays equal rights.

Every culture or society that has allowed homosexualty has ended up in the trash can of history.

Actually, western cultures tended to fall when taken over by ignorant and dangerous Christians. Examples are "the Dark Ages" and the "Inquisition". Then of course, there were the Muslims destroying culture after culture and their beliefs are shared with the Christians.

Republicans can't just "say" something and that makes it true. If that were the case, "mysticism" and the "occult" would be "real" and "Noah's Ark" would be a historical event and not just a "Children's Fable".

The Dark Ages and the Inquisition was a black-eye our history, which has nothing whatsoever to do with Evangelical Christians.

It was a warped movement that originated in Ancient Rome and the original Catholic church which has very little to do with Jesus and his teachings nor the modern day Christian today in the United States. It's like saying that Budists In India had something to do with the spread of Islam throughout the world.
 
Seriously Luissa, I live in a nice family neighborhood where children can play outside in safety.

If a homo moved in next door the whole neighborhood would change.

Parents would be afraid to let their children play outside unsupervised.

Plus people couldn't sell their house because no new family would want to move to a neighborhood with homos.


Well this is interesting. The safety of the children is used to justify a homophobic position. Is it realized the majority of child molesters are heterosexuals or is this another situation where demonizing gays is more important than accurate information?


The really sick part is realizing these myths enable molesters and actually help put children in more danger. Why is it more important to demonize gays versus protecting kids? Why do you think molesters join the church groups and boy scouts, etc.?
 
There is not a single valid, logical, or rational objection to affording gays equal rights.

Every culture or society that has allowed homosexualty has ended up in the trash can of history.


I'm not sure about the intention? Were you adding to the list of mythical reasons to be homophobic or are you seriously trying to repeat a falsehood and pass it off as fact?
 
There is not a single valid, logical, or rational objection to affording gays equal rights.

Every culture or society that has allowed homosexualty has ended up in the trash can of history.


I'm not sure about the intention? Were you adding to the list of mythical reasons to be homophobic or are you seriously trying to repeat a falsehood and pass it off as fact?

It think it was just a repeat of the usual Christian talking point.

I think that a permissive society tends to fail because of a lack of morals and or lack of core values and principles. Homosexuality tends to go hand in hand with this type of a society, as does beastiality and other perversions.
 
Last edited:
The word homophobe makes me laugh.

It implies that someone is afraid of homos.

What's there to be scared of?

As long as you don't touch one or breathe the same air.

You shouldn't catch any of their diseases or infections.


The same as not wanting to touch a turd.

It doesn't make you a turdophobe.

Just means you have enough sense to stay away from nasty smelly things :doubt:


A phobia is not restricted to "fear." In the general sense it simply means having an irrational objection.

I think it's highly rational to think that watching two guys with Harry Reams mustaches swapping spit in public causes the gag reflex in most people....not "Oh isn't that romantic".


Notice how specific male on male sexual references are made most often? That helps illuminate why homophobia is not based on sexual activity but rather the need to maintain a patriarchal structure. If all same sex activity were the true issue we would never see bisexuality among womyn being promoted and accepted.
 
Why just Islamic?
Because I'm a Muslim. Claiming to be a Muslim while happily violating one of the tenets of Islam (heterosexuality) makes a mockery of the religion. Therefore, I'd prefer that homosexuals stick to other types of marriage ceremonies. Admittedly, gays aren't exactly flocking to Islam in droves...

It's okay for all other faiths to be forced to perform them, except yours? Charming, I must say.
Wow.

Here's what I said:
Let them do whatever. I don't really care anymore as long as they're not having Islamic marriage ceremonies.​

Obviously, what I meant was:
I believe that all non-Islamic religions should be legally forced to accommodate homosexuals. Fuck infidels.​

I'm so thankful that you're here to clarify my posts. How anybody could understand the incomprehensible drivel in my original message is beyond me.

See, now I have to dismiss you as an idiot.
Oh God, not that.

Bwaaaaa-hahahahaha.
 
It is not irrational for a heterosexual to reject acceptance of a homosexual lifestyle just like it is not irrational for a homosexual to reject acceptance of a heterosexual lifestyle. However, we are not talking about one group or person forcing others into a submissive role of sexual orientation.

Thats exactly what homosexuals are doing to people who do not accept their lifestyle and to people who support and affirm traditional marriage between a man and woman. Thye're trying to force people to accept it by labeling them as homophobes if they don't.
 

Forum List

Back
Top