homosexual marriage

[LittleNipper]

Indeed, the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is founded upon the greatest of all evils: The desire to legalize the sexual pursuit of children.

What bigoted BS

What you call 'normalize Sexual abnormality'- the Supreme Court calls invasion of privacy

Lawrence v Texas the court said:

The Court held that homosexuals had a protected liberty interest to engage in private, sexual activity; that homosexuals' moral and sexual choices were entitled to constitutional protection; and that moral disapproval did not provide a legitimate justification for Texas's law criminalizing sodomy.[36]

Holding that "the Texas statute furthers no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual", the court struck down the anti-sodomy law as unconstitutional. Kennedy underscored the decision's focus on consensual adult sexual conduct in a private setting:

The present case does not involve minors. It does not involve persons who might be injured or coerced or who are situated in relationships where consent might not easily be refused. It does not involve public conduct or prostitution. It does not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter

The court was wrong; their reasoning was vacuous, their ruling specious and as is always the case in such decisions, the ramifications of such are going to be catastrophic.

Homosexuality is a deviant, abnormal sexuality. Meaning that the homosexual suffers from and in many cases nurtures and promotes a perversion of human sexuality.

The promotion of sexual abnormality represents a threat to the culture at large, wherein it undermines the cultures viability, perverting the standards which sustains the culture or societies viability. This injures those whose interests rests within the means of the society to remain viable.

There is no right to injure others... there is no 'right' where the exercise of such will injure another's means to exercise their own rights.

From this we can know that The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is a lie, fraudulently advanced as a means to influence the ignorant, designed toward no other purpose than to undermine the viability of the United States itself. And of course will be stopped. Either by adults who understand the catastrophic potential in tolerating evil or by nature itself, which seems determined to destroy it, on any number of levels.

Ironic given that holier-than-thou-keys seeks to injure those he deems unworthy of equal rights. We can thank the Founding Fathers for having the foresight to isolate rabid religious fundamentalists like him from imposing their malign will on the government of the people with a legal wall of separation.

For starters, the Founding Fathers could not have imagined anything even remotely approaching you and the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality. But, if it were possible to simply set a group of you into the world of the Founders, they would, after having listened to your story, set about slaughtering you, by the gross. Cutting you down where you stand... without apology or hesitation. Recognizing that you represent nothing short of manifest evil and as such, that your very presence was an irredeemable threat to them, personally, as well as to their families, neighbors and to the viability of their means to pursue the fulfillment of their lives.

Secondly, no one is taking away from any homosexual the means to exercise ANY POTENTIAL RIGHT.

You're invited to state IN SPECIFIC TERMS THE "RIGHT(S)" which you feel are being usurped... you will produce no legitimate examples of such usurpations... I can 'know' this due to my deep understanding of what rights are, from where they come and the responsibilities that sustain such.

Third, the Founders set no conditions which precluded any individual(s) from setting law and standards rooted in the observed and otherwise irrefutable natural principles common to their understanding of the universe about them.

See how easy that is?

Your delusions about the Founding Fathers are your problem. Do you seriously believe that none of them were gay or aware that there were gays amongst themselves?

George Washington Gay-friendly father of our country The Gay History Project

Where in all of the Federalist Papers was it stipulated that gays were to be denied their rights? Where in the Constitution does it say that gays were only to be counted as 3/5ths of a person for the census?

The answer is nowhere because the Founding Fathers were not homophobic bigots like you. They did not discriminate against gays because they weren't "threatened" by them the way lily livered cowards like you are scared of them today.

You can invent all kinds of imaginary strawmen but you cannot provide anything that substantiates that the FF shared your vile homophobic bigotry.

The onus is on your to prove that they were homophobic bigots like yourself.

So, no it won't be easy for you to come up with something that doesn't exist. But since it doesn't exist your position is negated. Now that was easy.

I like how people try to change history to suit their own way of thinking. Please read: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/v...earch="How did colonies treat homosexuality?"

 

[Syriusly]

What bigoted BS

What you call 'normalize Sexual abnormality'- the Supreme Court calls invasion of privacy

Lawrence v Texas the court said:

The Court held that homosexuals had a protected liberty interest to engage in private, sexual activity; that homosexuals' moral and sexual choices were entitled to constitutional protection; and that moral disapproval did not provide a legitimate justification for Texas's law criminalizing sodomy.[36]

Holding that "the Texas statute furthers no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual", the court struck down the anti-sodomy law as unconstitutional. Kennedy underscored the decision's focus on consensual adult sexual conduct in a private setting:

The present case does not involve minors. It does not involve persons who might be injured or coerced or who are situated in relationships where consent might not easily be refused. It does not involve public conduct or prostitution. It does not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter

The court was wrong; their reasoning was vacuous, their ruling specious and as is always the case in such decisions, the ramifications of such are going to be catastrophic.

Homosexuality is a deviant, abnormal sexuality. Meaning that the homosexual suffers from and in many cases nurtures and promotes a perversion of human sexuality.

The promotion of sexual abnormality represents a threat to the culture at large, wherein it undermines the cultures viability, perverting the standards which sustains the culture or societies viability. This injures those whose interests rests within the means of the society to remain viable.

There is no right to injure others... there is no 'right' where the exercise of such will injure another's means to exercise their own rights.

From this we can know that The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is a lie, fraudulently advanced as a means to influence the ignorant, designed toward no other purpose than to undermine the viability of the United States itself. And of course will be stopped. Either by adults who understand the catastrophic potential in tolerating evil or by nature itself, which seems determined to destroy it, on any number of levels.

Ironic given that holier-than-thou-keys seeks to injure those he deems unworthy of equal rights. We can thank the Founding Fathers for having the foresight to isolate rabid religious fundamentalists like him from imposing their malign will on the government of the people with a legal wall of separation.

For starters, the Founding Fathers could not have imagined anything even remotely approaching you and the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality. But, if it were possible to simply set a group of you into the world of the Founders, they would, after having listened to your story, set about slaughtering you, by the gross. Cutting you down where you stand... without apology or hesitation. Recognizing that you represent nothing short of manifest evil and as such, that your very presence was an irredeemable threat to them, personally, as well as to their families, neighbors and to the viability of their means to pursue the fulfillment of their lives.

Secondly, no one is taking away from any homosexual the means to exercise ANY POTENTIAL RIGHT.

You're invited to state IN SPECIFIC TERMS THE "RIGHT(S)" which you feel are being usurped... you will produce no legitimate examples of such usurpations... I can 'know' this due to my deep understanding of what rights are, from where they come and the responsibilities that sustain such.

Third, the Founders set no conditions which precluded any individual(s) from setting law and standards rooted in the observed and otherwise irrefutable natural principles common to their understanding of the universe about them.

See how easy that is?

Your delusions about the Founding Fathers are your problem. Do you seriously believe that none of them were gay or aware that there were gays amongst themselves?

George Washington Gay-friendly father of our country The Gay History Project

Where in all of the Federalist Papers was it stipulated that gays were to be denied their rights? Where in the Constitution does it say that gays were only to be counted as 3/5ths of a person for the census?

The answer is nowhere because the Founding Fathers were not homophobic bigots like you. They did not discriminate against gays because they weren't "threatened" by them the way lily livered cowards like you are scared of them today.

You can invent all kinds of imaginary strawmen but you cannot provide anything that substantiates that the FF shared your vile homophobic bigotry.

The onus is on your to prove that they were homophobic bigots like yourself.

So, no it won't be easy for you to come up with something that doesn't exist. But since it doesn't exist your position is negated. Now that was easy.

I like how people try to change history to suit their own way of thinking. Please read: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1061&context=englishfacpubs&sei-redir=1&referer=http://www.bing.com/search?q=How+did+the+colonies+treat+homosexuality%3F&form=HPDTDF&pc=HPDTDF&src=IE-SearchBox#search="How did colonies treat homosexuality?"

Fascinating- thanks for providing that glimpse into our history.

Puts the laws against homosexuality in the same league as laws against witchcraft and masturbation.

 

[Syriusly]

Ah, but that's just it, this Gay marriage is not a "thing' because we say so. Gay marriage is legally recognized because the Courts say so. And, between you, and the courts, guess which one has more authority to determine the legal reality of our society. Here's a hint, it's not you. So, in your own little bubble, you can insist that Gay Marriage doesn't exist all you like. However, while you are doing so, more, and more gay couples are engaging in that social contract that you keep insisting doesn't exist.

You are right, irony is sweet.

Gay Marriage IS a thing. Assuming of course that a fraudulence is a thing... and it is. That it's a judicially fabricated fraud, doesn't change that.

4 States- the number of states that voters have approved recognizing marriage equality for same gender couples.
7- the number of states and District of Columbia that have recognized marriage equality for same gender couples.

No 'judicially fabricated fraud'- that is just the whiny claim by those who are upset that discrimination is ending.

ZERO- the number of children ever produced by same gender coupling.

ALL- the number of human beings produced by opposite gender couplings.

Incredible I know

Which is exactly the same number produced by infertile and elderly couples. A bigot only wants to keep the gays from civil marriage and not infertile or childless by choice couples.

I know many infertile couples and elderly opposite gender couples who have had children.

There have never been any truly infertile couples who have had biological children together.
There have never been any couples who have married in the 80's who have produced children together after they have married.

And none of that has anything to do with homosexual marriage.

 

[Syriusly]

That is exactly what the Bill of Rights- and all such similar laws are for- to protect persons from government, from the tyranny of the majority.

Marriage is recognized as a Right in the United States- which means that you- and I- have a Right to marry- and that right can only be denied if the State can establish a compelling reason to deny that right. And that includes the right to marry the person we want to marry- whether that person happens to be of another race, or of the same gender.

The Bill of Rights recognizes God-given rights and limits the power of government from usurping the means of individuals to exercise their rights.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman...

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that Marriage is one man and one woman. Nor is there any Superior Court case which says our Right to marriage is limited to a man and a woman.

The Supreme Court had an opportunity to make that decision.

Instead they left stand the Federal Courts decision that the right of marriage applies equally to a couple consisting of two people of the same gender.

What your opinion is regarding what marriage is- or is not- ultimately is meaningless.

10 states and the District of Columbia have recognized that the right of marriage extends to same gender couples.
Some additional 20 states have had courts recognize that the right of marriage extends to same gender couples.

But don't worry- no one will force you to 'gay marry'- or even force you to attend a wedding you don't approve of.

Of course "Gay Marriage" might well harm your marriage...........

Gay marriage does more than harm other marriages. It injects a poison into the entire culture.

What harm do other marriages cause?
Who has died because of gay marriage?
How have you been personally harmed by two persons of the same gender marrying?

It seems to me that Sodom, Gomorrah, and a few other cities were eventually destroyed as a result of their view of sex and marriage. And it seems to me that when the Nazis began running for office, not just a few Jews imagined that everything would be okay and that they had nothing to fear --- given the fact of their heroics during the Great World War and nationalism. And I have not been personally harmed by the institution of gay marriage, but who is to say how those who disagree will be treated in the near future simply for their beliefs...

Great that you mentioned the Nazi's- who specifically selected homosexuals for discrimination and concentration camps.

Feel free to prove that ANY city, ever, has been destroyed as a result of their view of sex and marriage.

Personally I have never been harmed by Christians, but that doesn't mean I should assume that I will be mistreated by Christians in the future- simply because of my beliefs.

 

[Syriusly]

LOL! I suppose I'll never get my fill of watching the Left chronically throw their sexual needs into the face of the culture, while simultaneously crying that their sexual behavior is a VERY PERSONAL, PRIVATE MATTER.

Here's a clue scamp: The Right to Privacy is sustained ONLY through the responsibility to keep that which you feel is private: PRIVATE! Otherwise, you forfeit your right to privacy.

Its sorta like how where you claim a right to your life, you CAN'T take the lives of others (without a sound moral justification0 without forfeiting your own right to your own life.

See how that works?

They seem more than happy to put their noses in hetros bedrooms when they speak of some hetros inability to procreate.

Curious aye?

I wonder who that is you speak of.

Certainly not anyone who is for the privacy of adults to be free from the Government Sex Police telling them how they can- or cannot have sex.

I don't care how anyone gets off

Only one of those ways can, and often does creates a child

Doing so is not without considerable risk.

And is far far different then the others

Well for someone who doesn't care- you keep bringing it up.

Do you think that Government should be telling you what kind of sex you can have in the privacy of your bedroom?
Do you believe that Government should limit sex to sex which is intended to create babies?

Yes, I think the government should jail fathers for attempted marriage to their daughters. Even as adults the dynamics of the relationship is do far distant from other opposite gender marriages. Just as it is for same gender relationships.

Hope this clears that up.

Were you planning on marrying your daughter?

Here were my questions to you:

Do you think that Government should be telling you what kind of sex you can have in the privacy of your bedroom?
Do you believe that Government should limit sex to sex which is intended to create babies?

 

[Derideo_Te]

What bigoted BS

What you call 'normalize Sexual abnormality'- the Supreme Court calls invasion of privacy

Lawrence v Texas the court said:

The Court held that homosexuals had a protected liberty interest to engage in private, sexual activity; that homosexuals' moral and sexual choices were entitled to constitutional protection; and that moral disapproval did not provide a legitimate justification for Texas's law criminalizing sodomy.[36]

Holding that "the Texas statute furthers no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual", the court struck down the anti-sodomy law as unconstitutional. Kennedy underscored the decision's focus on consensual adult sexual conduct in a private setting:

The present case does not involve minors. It does not involve persons who might be injured or coerced or who are situated in relationships where consent might not easily be refused. It does not involve public conduct or prostitution. It does not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter

The court was wrong; their reasoning was vacuous, their ruling specious and as is always the case in such decisions, the ramifications of such are going to be catastrophic.

Homosexuality is a deviant, abnormal sexuality. Meaning that the homosexual suffers from and in many cases nurtures and promotes a perversion of human sexuality.

The promotion of sexual abnormality represents a threat to the culture at large, wherein it undermines the cultures viability, perverting the standards which sustains the culture or societies viability. This injures those whose interests rests within the means of the society to remain viable.

There is no right to injure others... there is no 'right' where the exercise of such will injure another's means to exercise their own rights.

From this we can know that The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is a lie, fraudulently advanced as a means to influence the ignorant, designed toward no other purpose than to undermine the viability of the United States itself. And of course will be stopped. Either by adults who understand the catastrophic potential in tolerating evil or by nature itself, which seems determined to destroy it, on any number of levels.

Ironic given that holier-than-thou-keys seeks to injure those he deems unworthy of equal rights. We can thank the Founding Fathers for having the foresight to isolate rabid religious fundamentalists like him from imposing their malign will on the government of the people with a legal wall of separation.

For starters, the Founding Fathers could not have imagined anything even remotely approaching you and the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality. But, if it were possible to simply set a group of you into the world of the Founders, they would, after having listened to your story, set about slaughtering you, by the gross. Cutting you down where you stand... without apology or hesitation. Recognizing that you represent nothing short of manifest evil and as such, that your very presence was an irredeemable threat to them, personally, as well as to their families, neighbors and to the viability of their means to pursue the fulfillment of their lives.

Secondly, no one is taking away from any homosexual the means to exercise ANY POTENTIAL RIGHT.

You're invited to state IN SPECIFIC TERMS THE "RIGHT(S)" which you feel are being usurped... you will produce no legitimate examples of such usurpations... I can 'know' this due to my deep understanding of what rights are, from where they come and the responsibilities that sustain such.

Third, the Founders set no conditions which precluded any individual(s) from setting law and standards rooted in the observed and otherwise irrefutable natural principles common to their understanding of the universe about them.

See how easy that is?

Your delusions about the Founding Fathers are your problem. Do you seriously believe that none of them were gay or aware that there were gays amongst themselves?

George Washington Gay-friendly father of our country The Gay History Project

Where in all of the Federalist Papers was it stipulated that gays were to be denied their rights? Where in the Constitution does it say that gays were only to be counted as 3/5ths of a person for the census?

The answer is nowhere because the Founding Fathers were not homophobic bigots like you. They did not discriminate against gays because they weren't "threatened" by them the way lily livered cowards like you are scared of them today.

You can invent all kinds of imaginary strawmen but you cannot provide anything that substantiates that the FF shared your vile homophobic bigotry.

The onus is on your to prove that they were homophobic bigots like yourself.

So, no it won't be easy for you to come up with something that doesn't exist. But since it doesn't exist your position is negated. Now that was easy.

I like how people try to change history to suit their own way of thinking. Please read: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1061&context=englishfacpubs&sei-redir=1&referer=http://www.bing.com/search?q=How+did+the+colonies+treat+homosexuality%3F&form=HPDTDF&pc=HPDTDF&src=IE-SearchBox#search="How did colonies treat homosexuality?"

Explain why Washington never imposed the death penalty at Valley Forge when sodomy was happening all around him?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

The court was wrong; their reasoning was vacuous, their ruling specious and as is always the case in such decisions, the ramifications of such are going to be catastrophic.

Homosexuality is a deviant, abnormal sexuality. Meaning that the homosexual suffers from and in many cases nurtures and promotes a perversion of human sexuality.

The promotion of sexual abnormality represents a threat to the culture at large, wherein it undermines the cultures viability, perverting the standards which sustains the culture or societies viability. This injures those whose interests rests within the means of the society to remain viable.

There is no right to injure others... there is no 'right' where the exercise of such will injure another's means to exercise their own rights.

From this we can know that The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality is a lie, fraudulently advanced as a means to influence the ignorant, designed toward no other purpose than to undermine the viability of the United States itself. And of course will be stopped. Either by adults who understand the catastrophic potential in tolerating evil or by nature itself, which seems determined to destroy it, on any number of levels.

Ironic given that holier-than-thou-keys seeks to injure those he deems unworthy of equal rights. We can thank the Founding Fathers for having the foresight to isolate rabid religious fundamentalists like him from imposing their malign will on the government of the people with a legal wall of separation.

For starters, the Founding Fathers could not have imagined anything even remotely approaching you and the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality. But, if it were possible to simply set a group of you into the world of the Founders, they would, after having listened to your story, set about slaughtering you, by the gross. Cutting you down where you stand... without apology or hesitation. Recognizing that you represent nothing short of manifest evil and as such, that your very presence was an irredeemable threat to them, personally, as well as to their families, neighbors and to the viability of their means to pursue the fulfillment of their lives.

Secondly, no one is taking away from any homosexual the means to exercise ANY POTENTIAL RIGHT.

You're invited to state IN SPECIFIC TERMS THE "RIGHT(S)" which you feel are being usurped... you will produce no legitimate examples of such usurpations... I can 'know' this due to my deep understanding of what rights are, from where they come and the responsibilities that sustain such.

Third, the Founders set no conditions which precluded any individual(s) from setting law and standards rooted in the observed and otherwise irrefutable natural principles common to their understanding of the universe about them.

See how easy that is?

Your delusions about the Founding Fathers are your problem. Do you seriously believe that none of them were gay or aware that there were gays amongst themselves?

George Washington Gay-friendly father of our country The Gay History Project

Where in all of the Federalist Papers was it stipulated that gays were to be denied their rights? Where in the Constitution does it say that gays were only to be counted as 3/5ths of a person for the census?

The answer is nowhere because the Founding Fathers were not homophobic bigots like you. They did not discriminate against gays because they weren't "threatened" by them the way lily livered cowards like you are scared of them today.

You can invent all kinds of imaginary strawmen but you cannot provide anything that substantiates that the FF shared your vile homophobic bigotry.

The onus is on your to prove that they were homophobic bigots like yourself.

So, no it won't be easy for you to come up with something that doesn't exist. But since it doesn't exist your position is negated. Now that was easy.

I like how people try to change history to suit their own way of thinking. Please read: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1061&context=englishfacpubs&sei-redir=1&referer=http://www.bing.com/search?q=How+did+the+colonies+treat+homosexuality%3F&form=HPDTDF&pc=HPDTDF&src=IE-SearchBox#search="How did colonies treat homosexuality?"

Explain why Washington never imposed the death penalty at Valley Forge when sodomy was happening all around him?

Just like abortion, sodomy has been around from the beginning.

And so have busybodies who think what others are doing is their business.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

A pastor; liberal or conservative, should not be forced to marry anyone against their wishes. That is a matter of the church, not the state.

The magistrate on the other hand is an official of the state and must preform his lawful duty regardless of his personal views on the matter. Gays are legally allowed to marry in his jurisdiction so he must perform the duties of his office. If he refuses to do so then he should either resign or be fired for failure to perform those duties. A stripper that does not take their clothes off doesn't have a job. Simple as that.

This is among the nastiest misnomers in Relativism. Being a member of the government, in NO WAY obligates someone to take actions which are abhorrent to them.

There is no such thing as 'gay marriage'. Marriage is the joining of one man and one wo-man.

What's more, by taking such action, a magistrate who recognizes, respect, defends and adheres to the laws of nature, they would be 'establishing the cult of perversion' as the national religion.

The Federal Government, in tolerating the respective states FORCING individuals to PARTICIPATE IN THE CELEBRATION OF PERVERSION... is ... USING THE LEFT'S LONG STANDING REASONING: ESTABLISHING THE RELIGION OF DEVIANCY AS THE ENFORCED NATIONAL RELIGION.

Now... be honest... which you adherents and promoters of debauchery, truly 'feel's that this crap is going to be tolerated for much longer?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Ironic given that holier-than-thou-keys seeks to injure those he deems unworthy of equal rights. We can thank the Founding Fathers for having the foresight to isolate rabid religious fundamentalists like him from imposing their malign will on the government of the people with a legal wall of separation.

For starters, the Founding Fathers could not have imagined anything even remotely approaching you and the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality. But, if it were possible to simply set a group of you into the world of the Founders, they would, after having listened to your story, set about slaughtering you, by the gross. Cutting you down where you stand... without apology or hesitation. Recognizing that you represent nothing short of manifest evil and as such, that your very presence was an irredeemable threat to them, personally, as well as to their families, neighbors and to the viability of their means to pursue the fulfillment of their lives.

Secondly, no one is taking away from any homosexual the means to exercise ANY POTENTIAL RIGHT.

You're invited to state IN SPECIFIC TERMS THE "RIGHT(S)" which you feel are being usurped... you will produce no legitimate examples of such usurpations... I can 'know' this due to my deep understanding of what rights are, from where they come and the responsibilities that sustain such.

Third, the Founders set no conditions which precluded any individual(s) from setting law and standards rooted in the observed and otherwise irrefutable natural principles common to their understanding of the universe about them.

See how easy that is?

Your delusions about the Founding Fathers are your problem. Do you seriously believe that none of them were gay or aware that there were gays amongst themselves?

George Washington Gay-friendly father of our country The Gay History Project

Where in all of the Federalist Papers was it stipulated that gays were to be denied their rights? Where in the Constitution does it say that gays were only to be counted as 3/5ths of a person for the census?

The answer is nowhere because the Founding Fathers were not homophobic bigots like you. They did not discriminate against gays because they weren't "threatened" by them the way lily livered cowards like you are scared of them today.

You can invent all kinds of imaginary strawmen but you cannot provide anything that substantiates that the FF shared your vile homophobic bigotry.

The onus is on your to prove that they were homophobic bigots like yourself.

So, no it won't be easy for you to come up with something that doesn't exist. But since it doesn't exist your position is negated. Now that was easy.

I like how people try to change history to suit their own way of thinking. Please read: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1061&context=englishfacpubs&sei-redir=1&referer=http://www.bing.com/search?q=How+did+the+colonies+treat+homosexuality%3F&form=HPDTDF&pc=HPDTDF&src=IE-SearchBox#search="How did colonies treat homosexuality?"

Explain why Washington never imposed the death penalty at Valley Forge when sodomy was happening all around him?

Just like abortion, sodomy has been around from the beginning.

And so have busybodies who think what others are doing is their business.

So has the clap... yet only the Ideological Left is working day and night to normalize it...


And the reason that only the lowest common denominators are doing so, is because to do so is to demonstrate one's intellectual, moral and philosophical limitations. (For the benefit of those 'people'. That means that such people are idiots, fools and sociopaths, who's public advocacies and chosen lifestyles threaten the wellbeing of everyone from themselves to those they do not know, will never know and who don't know them. They're what amounts to a festering boil in the buttocks of humanity)

 

[Syriusly]

Now... be honest... which you adherents and promoters of debauchery, truly 'feel's that this crap is going to be tolerated for much longer?

Because under the U.S Constitution we have freedom of speech, I believe that the crap that the anti-homosexuals spout will continue to be tolerated, but increasingly mocked, and increasingly marginalized.

 

[Syriusly]

For starters, the Founding Fathers could not have imagined anything even remotely approaching you and the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality. But, if it were possible to simply set a group of you into the world of the Founders, they would, after having listened to your story, set about slaughtering you, by the gross. Cutting you down where you stand... without apology or hesitation. Recognizing that you represent nothing short of manifest evil and as such, that your very presence was an irredeemable threat to them, personally, as well as to their families, neighbors and to the viability of their means to pursue the fulfillment of their lives.

Secondly, no one is taking away from any homosexual the means to exercise ANY POTENTIAL RIGHT.

You're invited to state IN SPECIFIC TERMS THE "RIGHT(S)" which you feel are being usurped... you will produce no legitimate examples of such usurpations... I can 'know' this due to my deep understanding of what rights are, from where they come and the responsibilities that sustain such.

Third, the Founders set no conditions which precluded any individual(s) from setting law and standards rooted in the observed and otherwise irrefutable natural principles common to their understanding of the universe about them.

See how easy that is?

Your delusions about the Founding Fathers are your problem. Do you seriously believe that none of them were gay or aware that there were gays amongst themselves?

George Washington Gay-friendly father of our country The Gay History Project

Where in all of the Federalist Papers was it stipulated that gays were to be denied their rights? Where in the Constitution does it say that gays were only to be counted as 3/5ths of a person for the census?

The answer is nowhere because the Founding Fathers were not homophobic bigots like you. They did not discriminate against gays because they weren't "threatened" by them the way lily livered cowards like you are scared of them today.

You can invent all kinds of imaginary strawmen but you cannot provide anything that substantiates that the FF shared your vile homophobic bigotry.

The onus is on your to prove that they were homophobic bigots like yourself.

So, no it won't be easy for you to come up with something that doesn't exist. But since it doesn't exist your position is negated. Now that was easy.

I like how people try to change history to suit their own way of thinking. Please read: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1061&context=englishfacpubs&sei-redir=1&referer=http://www.bing.com/search?q=How+did+the+colonies+treat+homosexuality%3F&form=HPDTDF&pc=HPDTDF&src=IE-SearchBox#search="How did colonies treat homosexuality?"

Explain why Washington never imposed the death penalty at Valley Forge when sodomy was happening all around him?

Just like abortion, sodomy has been around from the beginning.

And so have busybodies who think what others are doing is their business.

So has the clap... yet only the Ideological Left is working day and night to normalize it...
y)

So now you want to criminalize getting a sexually transmitted disease?

Why am I not surprised.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Puts the laws against homosexuality in the same league as laws against witchcraft and masturbation.

Yes... We can rest assured that when the laws against witchcraft and masturbation were closed, a fellow sat with his mates at some tavern and noted that the lowering of that standard set the culture on the path toward purgatory; noting further than because of the drive to make life easier for those animated by evil, that some day during the twilight prior to our national demise, men will marry men, women will marry woman, women will marry their pets, adults will openly partake in the engestatjion of illicit, mind altering drugs and adults will openly claim that sex with children will benefit children, even as the elected officials intentionally import into the nation, the most deadly disease ever encountered by the human race, as they feign publicly that the public should have no concern and that all is well.

The sad part is that this guy was, the least of the intellects common to his day... but firmly planted in what as, then: every day, typical, common sense.

 

[Syriusly]

Puts the laws against homosexuality in the same league as laws against witchcraft and masturbation.

Yes... We can rest assured that when the laws against witchcraft and masturbation were closed,

That some form of rationalization was achieved. That superstition no longer drove the majority to prosecute minorities for whatever personal behavior that they thought was icky.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

So now you want to criminalize getting a sexually transmitted disease?

If only there was ANYTHING in the record which would lend to that inference, what a GREAT POINT that would have been... .

Sadly, given the absence of anything which could reasonably lead to such an inference, the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that your intention there is to offer such a deceit, through fraudulence means, toward the goal of influencing the ignorant. (That means you're proven yourself to be a liar, whose purpose here is fool others into believing that something which you know to be false, is true. OKA: A Progressive, Liberal... socialist.)

What I said was that the Ideological Left is the only group advocating that Sexually Transmitted Diseases be normalized... and while sound reasoning never requires validation, it is ALWAYS NICE, when it happens and never less so, than when it happens in such hysterically incontestable terms.

Folks, what you're looking at in the public professions of the above member is the personification of evil.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Puts the laws against homosexuality in the same league as laws against witchcraft and masturbation.

Yes... We can rest assured that when the laws against witchcraft and masturbation were closed,

That some form of rationalization was achieved. That superstition no longer drove the majority to prosecute minorities for whatever personal behavior that they thought was icky.

Rationalization? LOL!

So in your mind, lowering standards has lead the US to a higher level, providing a stronger, more sustainable culture... is a fact, and noting the historical facts, which show the US Culture has devolved below the depths of Caligularian vulgarity, is a rationalization?


ROFLMNAO!


Anyone need anything else? Socio-pathetic delusion doesn't GET more profoundly demonstrated, than THAT!

 

[Syriusly]

Puts the laws against homosexuality in the same league as laws against witchcraft and masturbation.

Yes... We can rest assured that when the laws against witchcraft and masturbation were closed,

That some form of rationalization was achieved. That superstition no longer drove the majority to prosecute minorities for whatever personal behavior that they thought was icky.

Rationalization? LOL!

So in your mind, lowering standards has lead the US to a higher level, providing a stronger, more sustainable culture... is a fact, and noting the historical facts, which show the US Culture has devolved below the depths of Caligularian vulgarity, is a rationalization?
!

Considering how much better off we in America are since the 17th century, yes- we have a stronger more sustainable culture.

No matter how much bigots hate the fact that women, blacks, Jews, homosexuals, and other formerly despised minorities have a place at the table now- we are better off for it.

No matter how much the Big Brother advocates want to criminalize private sexual behavior- making for instance of all things- masturbation illegal- we are better off as a nation not jailing(or executing or flogging etc) people for jerking off in their bedroom.

I know you miss the good old days of the stocks and the floggings, but yes we are better off now

 

[Syriusly]

So now you want to criminalize getting a sexually transmitted disease?

What I said was that the Ideological Left is the only group advocating that Sexually Transmitted Diseases be normalizedl.

Oh did I misunderstand- you are upset that the "Left" wants STD's to be treated like every other disease?

Do you want STD's to be treated by prayer and witch doctors- or by modern medicine like we 'normally' treat other diseases?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Puts the laws against homosexuality in the same league as laws against witchcraft and masturbation.

Yes... We can rest assured that when the laws against witchcraft and masturbation were closed, a fellow sat with his mates at some tavern and noted that the lowering of that standard set the culture on the path toward purgatory; noting further than because of the drive to make life easier for those animated by evil, that some day during the twilight prior to our national demise, men will marry men, women will marry woman, women will marry their pets, adults will openly partake in the engestatjion of illicit, mind altering drugs and adults will openly claim that sex with children will benefit children, even as the elected officials intentionally import into the nation, the most deadly disease ever encountered by the human race, as they feign publicly that the public should have no concern and that all is well.

The sad part is that this guy was, the least of the intellects common to his day... but firmly planted in what as, then: every day, typical, common sense.

That some form of rationalization was achieved. That superstition no longer drove the majority to prosecute minorities for whatever personal behavior that they thought was icky.

The Bill of Rights recognizes God-given rights and limits the power of government from usurping the means of individuals to exercise their rights.

Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman...

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that Marriage is one man and one woman. Nor is there any Superior Court case which says our Right to marriage is limited to a man and a woman.

The Supreme Court had an opportunity to make that decision.

Instead they left stand the Federal Courts decision that the right of marriage applies equally to a couple consisting of two people of the same gender.

What your opinion is regarding what marriage is- or is not- ultimately is meaningless.

10 states and the District of Columbia have recognized that the right of marriage extends to same gender couples.
Some additional 20 states have had courts recognize that the right of marriage extends to same gender couples.

But don't worry- no one will force you to 'gay marry'- or even force you to attend a wedding you don't approve of.

Of course "Gay Marriage" might well harm your marriage...........

Gay marriage does more than harm other marriages. It injects a poison into the entire culture.

What harm do other marriages cause?
Who has died because of gay marriage?
How have you been personally harmed by two persons of the same gender marrying?

It seems to me that Sodom, Gomorrah, and a few other cities were eventually destroyed as a result of their view of sex and marriage. And it seems to me that when the Nazis began running for office, not just a few Jews imagined that everything would be okay and that they had nothing to fear --- given the fact of their heroics during the Great World War and nationalism. And I have not been personally harmed by the institution of gay marriage, but who is to say how those who disagree will be treated in the near future simply for their beliefs...

Great that you mentioned the Nazi's- who specifically selected homosexuals for discrimination and concentration camps.

Feel free to prove that ANY city, ever, has been destroyed as a result of their view of sex and marriage.

Personally I have never been harmed by Christians, but that doesn't mean I should assume that I will be mistreated by Christians in the future- simply because of my beliefs.

Well... The issue isn't simply their 'views' on sex, but their subjective perspective, wherein they allowed their 'views' on sexual behavior effect their public policy, inducing the chronic lowering of standards and cultural mores, to the point where sufficient individuals came to expect that no standard was relevant to them and no principle worthy of defending or adherence, until the culture (City-state) finally collapsed. Most other extinct cultures present excellent examples.

Suffice it to say that culture's enjoying populations of individuals committed to strong moral adherence, do not fail... yet every culture with weak moral underpinnings, do.

Weird huh? And SO UNFAIR!

 

[Syriusly]

Puts the laws against homosexuality in the same league as laws against witchcraft and masturbation.

Yes... We can rest assured that when the laws against witchcraft and masturbation were closed, a fellow sat with his mates at some tavern and noted that the lowering of that standard set the culture on the path toward purgatory; noting further than because of the drive to make life easier for those animated by evil, that some day during the twilight prior to our national demise, men will marry men, women will marry woman, women will marry their pets, adults will openly partake in the engestatjion of illicit, mind altering drugs and adults will openly claim that sex with children will benefit children, even as the elected officials intentionally import into the nation, the most deadly disease ever encountered by the human race, as they feign publicly that the public should have no concern and that all is well.

The sad part is that this guy was, the least of the intellects common to his day... but firmly planted in what as, then: every day, typical, common sense.

That some form of rationalization was achieved. That superstition no longer drove the majority to prosecute minorities for whatever personal behavior that they thought was icky.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that Marriage is one man and one woman. Nor is there any Superior Court case which says our Right to marriage is limited to a man and a woman.

The Supreme Court had an opportunity to make that decision.

Instead they left stand the Federal Courts decision that the right of marriage applies equally to a couple consisting of two people of the same gender.

What your opinion is regarding what marriage is- or is not- ultimately is meaningless.

10 states and the District of Columbia have recognized that the right of marriage extends to same gender couples.
Some additional 20 states have had courts recognize that the right of marriage extends to same gender couples.

But don't worry- no one will force you to 'gay marry'- or even force you to attend a wedding you don't approve of.

Of course "Gay Marriage" might well harm your marriage...........

Gay marriage does more than harm other marriages. It injects a poison into the entire culture.

What harm do other marriages cause?
Who has died because of gay marriage?
How have you been personally harmed by two persons of the same gender marrying?

It seems to me that Sodom, Gomorrah, and a few other cities were eventually destroyed as a result of their view of sex and marriage. And it seems to me that when the Nazis began running for office, not just a few Jews imagined that everything would be okay and that they had nothing to fear --- given the fact of their heroics during the Great World War and nationalism. And I have not been personally harmed by the institution of gay marriage, but who is to say how those who disagree will be treated in the near future simply for their beliefs...

Great that you mentioned the Nazi's- who specifically selected homosexuals for discrimination and concentration camps.

Feel free to prove that ANY city, ever, has been destroyed as a result of their view of sex and marriage.

Personally I have never been harmed by Christians, but that doesn't mean I should assume that I will be mistreated by Christians in the future- simply because of my beliefs.

Well... The issue isn't simply their 'views' on sex, but their subjective perspective, wherein they allowed their 'views' on sexual behavior effect their public policy, inducing the chronic lowering of standards and cultural mores, to the point where sufficient individuals came to expect that no standard was relevant to them and no principle worthy of defending or adherence, until the culture (City-state) finally collapsed. Most other extinct cultures present excellent examples.

Suffice it to say that culture's enjoying populations of individuals committed to strong moral adherence, do not fail... yet every culture with weak moral underpinnings, do.
!

Feel free to prove any civilizations went 'extinct' in the manner you described.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

So now you want to criminalize getting a sexually transmitted disease?

What I said was that the Ideological Left is the only group advocating that Sexually Transmitted Diseases be normalizedl.

Oh did I misunderstand- you are upset that the "Left" wants STD's to be treated like every other disease?

Do you want STD's to be treated by prayer and witch doctors- or by modern medicine like we 'normally' treat other diseases?

Upset?

I'm not upset by the Left's refusal to accept their responsibility in the spreading of disease through and as a direct result of the weakness of their individual and by extension their collective character. I am amused by it. Much as I am amused by watching some kid run his skate board along a stair rail... in full knowledge that the likelihood is that he's about to set his testicles under the pressure of his momentum, multiplied by the energy value of his mass. In most cases, it is HYSTERICAL.

Except of course where he crushes his groin and supporting bone structure, tearing his scrotum, leaving his testicles dangling through the torn clothing and laying against his bloody leg, as he lays there in shock, trying to figure out why he can't move.

And sure... the clap isn't much of a big deal today, although in your own grandmother's day, it was lethal in most cases. What IS a big deal, is the same attitude which you're presently demonstrating, set aside the deadly nature of AIDs, causing the deaths of tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of your fellow degenerates. And now, that same stupidity is in power, dismissing E-FRICKEN-BOLA~ .

Threatening the lives of MILLIONS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE, who's only crime is that they haven't taken to the streets, dragging you people from your homes and annihilating you where you're found. They tolerated you, because you said you were reasonable people. And for their trust, you've set about to destroy the foundational standards of their nation, having now infected their culture with the most deadly virus ever witnessed by humanity in its entire history.

That... yeah, THAT really pisses me off.