If you are agaianst gay marriage, you're a BIGOT!

[Artevelde]

Your religion has no place in my government.

And if you believed in freedom and liberty, you would believe in it for all, not just those who hold the same beliefs as you.

As I said, those who refuse the same rights and privileges to all are bigots. Hence, you have labeled yourself thus.

Where did I talk about religion? Thr fact that marriage as a union between a man and a woman is one of the foundations of human society is not linked to any particular religion but is a universal fact that long predates most religious rules.

Stop being so bigotted in your anti-religious mania.

Bullshit. Youve mistaken my distaste for your religion in my government as a condemnation of faith.

Your lack of understanding of history shows that your personal religious belief system has overrun your reason. Same sex marriage has existed long before Christianity even came to be. In ancient China and Europe same sex marriage was common. Not one but TWO Roman emporers took men as spouses, Nero and Elagabalus. Church weddings of same sex couples took place in Spain as far back as 1061.

The concept that marriage is between a single man and a single woman is a relatively new one in human history, no matter how much you may try to rewrite it to suit your present bigotry.

Again you resort to lies. I know a lot more about history than you do and your posting is nothing but a collection of lies.

 

[Vidi]

Where did I talk about religion? Thr fact that marriage as a union between a man and a woman is one of the foundations of human society is not linked to any particular religion but is a universal fact that long predates most religious rules.

Stop being so bigotted in your anti-religious mania.

Bullshit. Youve mistaken my distaste for your religion in my government as a condemnation of faith.

Your lack of understanding of history shows that your personal religious belief system has overrun your reason. Same sex marriage has existed long before Christianity even came to be. In ancient China and Europe same sex marriage was common. Not one but TWO Roman emporers took men as spouses, Nero and Elagabalus. Church weddings of same sex couples took place in Spain as far back as 1061.

The concept that marriage is between a single man and a single woman is a relatively new one in human history, no matter how much you may try to rewrite it to suit your present bigotry.

Again you resort to lies. I know a lot more about history than you do and your posting is nothing but a collection of lies.

You're fooling yourself

Classics Newsletter Winter 2004

Same-Sex Unions throughout Time: A History of Gay Marriage

History is no lie.

 

[Artevelde]

Bullshit. Youve mistaken my distaste for your religion in my government as a condemnation of faith.

Your lack of understanding of history shows that your personal religious belief system has overrun your reason. Same sex marriage has existed long before Christianity even came to be. In ancient China and Europe same sex marriage was common. Not one but TWO Roman emporers took men as spouses, Nero and Elagabalus. Church weddings of same sex couples took place in Spain as far back as 1061.

The concept that marriage is between a single man and a single woman is a relatively new one in human history, no matter how much you may try to rewrite it to suit your present bigotry.

Again you resort to lies. I know a lot more about history than you do and your posting is nothing but a collection of lies.

You're fooling yourself

Classics Newsletter Winter 2004

Same-Sex Unions throughout Time: A History of Gay Marriage

History is no lie.

I am a historian. You are a liar.

 

[Papageorgio]

I know, it's almost as big of a deal as abortion, don't you think?

Not really. Where do we draw the line? What if three men or women want to marry? How about those who love their pets? Why not legalize polygamy, aren't they deserving of the same rights if this is what they choose? Why not two minors who are willing? FYI I am pro choice but against the govt funding of it. It should not be illegal to have an abortion (with limitations such as late term), but the govt should not be involved in paying for people's mistakes.

But you are okay with government paying welfare payments to support those kids, right? Just saying, in the end, abortion cuts down on unwanted children that become a burden to the system and taxpayers. I'm not using it as an argument supporting abortion but just pointing out the fact of the situation.

As for allowing gays to marry, your other examples really are not the same thing. Polygamy involves multiple people marrying or one person marrying more than one person. Gays are not asking for this. Gays are also not wanting or asking for the right to marry their pets. What they want, is the right to marry the one person they love, which happens to be someone of the same sex, and the reason they are of the same sex is because that is how they were made. The Church may not like it, but here is the fact; with some people, God fucked up. God made these people gay, so we ought to let them marry.

Now I know everyone of the religious nutjobs is going to tell me I'm full of shit, that gays choose their lifestyle. Bottom line is if you know many gay people, then you will know that they did not choose that lifestyle; it was chosen for them.

Bottom line about gay marriage is that I do not support gay marriage. I support the right of gay people to marry. The difference being that not everyone should be forced to marry a gay person.

So if a mother loves a son and both adults, should they be allowed to marry? If a brother and sister want to marry, should they be allowed?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I am a bigot you are correct.

 

[Vidi]

Again you resort to lies. I know a lot more about history than you do and your posting is nothing but a collection of lies.

You're fooling yourself

Classics Newsletter Winter 2004

Same-Sex Unions throughout Time: A History of Gay Marriage

History is no lie.

I am a historian. You are a liar.

No. You are a poor historian. One that lets your own predjudices blind you to the truth. You have to whitewash history so that it fits into your worldview rather than let it inform you.

You can throw your little tantrum and call names all you want, but the TRUTH will not be silenced by the likes of you. The likes of you found ways to justify slavery and segregation and lynching and miscegenation laws. The likes of you quoted scripture and demanded that civilized society demanded your close minded bigoted views must be upheld as absolute. The likes of you have always and will always oppose progress from the dark into the light, from bigotry into tolerance, from slavery to freedom. The likes of you pay lip service to the ideals of our country but when push comes to shove, you desecrate the values of freedom and liberty for ALL. The likes of you made claims that the "foundation of human society" was built upon your small minded worldview and yours alone.

The likes of you are wrong.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As if all the troubles our country is having are suddenly solved and the most important matter now is our president's stance in gay marriage. I personally don't care what a man likes to do with his his ass, and whether they should be allowed to legally marry or not. It's not even worth my time, I've know many gays and they seem to be just like straights, there's good and bad in them. But to suddenly make this issue center stage of what is happening to our country? This is obviously another head fake, a distraction and a diversion from the disastrous epic fail this president has been both domestically and internationally since he took office. And the media is doing a great job of assisting him.

It does however, highlight who this man is, and what his views generally are. As predicted before he got elected, he's a radical blame America socialist anti capitalist who's done nothing but divide the people of this country. And boy has he come through with flying colors. The sooner we vote this deceptive traitor out of office the better.

I know, it's almost as big of a deal as abortion, don't you think?

Murder of innocent is a big deal too me.

 

[Artevelde]

You're fooling yourself

Classics Newsletter Winter 2004

Same-Sex Unions throughout Time: A History of Gay Marriage

History is no lie.

I am a historian. You are a liar.

No. You are a poor historian. One that lets your own predjudices blind you to the truth. You have to whitewash history so that it fits into your worldview rather than let it inform you.

You can throw your little tantrum and call names all you want, but the TRUTH will not be silenced by the likes of you. The likes of you found ways to justify slavery and segregation and lynching and miscegenation laws. The likes of you quoted scripture and demanded that civilized society demanded your close minded bigoted views must be upheld as absolute. The likes of you have always and will always oppose progress from the dark into the light, from bigotry into tolerance, from slavery to freedom. The likes of you pay lip service to the ideals of our country but when push comes to shove, you desecrate the values of freedom and liberty for ALL. The likes of you made claims that the "foundation of human society" was built upon your small minded worldview and yours alone.

The likes of you are wrong.

You're really pretty pathetic and sad.

 

[Vidi]

Not really. Where do we draw the line? What if three men or women want to marry? How about those who love their pets? Why not legalize polygamy, aren't they deserving of the same rights if this is what they choose? Why not two minors who are willing? FYI I am pro choice but against the govt funding of it. It should not be illegal to have an abortion (with limitations such as late term), but the govt should not be involved in paying for people's mistakes.

But you are okay with government paying welfare payments to support those kids, right? Just saying, in the end, abortion cuts down on unwanted children that become a burden to the system and taxpayers. I'm not using it as an argument supporting abortion but just pointing out the fact of the situation.

As for allowing gays to marry, your other examples really are not the same thing. Polygamy involves multiple people marrying or one person marrying more than one person. Gays are not asking for this. Gays are also not wanting or asking for the right to marry their pets. What they want, is the right to marry the one person they love, which happens to be someone of the same sex, and the reason they are of the same sex is because that is how they were made. The Church may not like it, but here is the fact; with some people, God fucked up. God made these people gay, so we ought to let them marry.

Now I know everyone of the religious nutjobs is going to tell me I'm full of shit, that gays choose their lifestyle. Bottom line is if you know many gay people, then you will know that they did not choose that lifestyle; it was chosen for them.

Bottom line about gay marriage is that I do not support gay marriage. I support the right of gay people to marry. The difference being that not everyone should be forced to marry a gay person.

So if a mother loves a son and both adults, should they be allowed to marry? If a brother and sister want to marry, should they be allowed?

Hyperbole to justify bigotry is still bigotry.

 

[Artevelde]

But you are okay with government paying welfare payments to support those kids, right? Just saying, in the end, abortion cuts down on unwanted children that become a burden to the system and taxpayers. I'm not using it as an argument supporting abortion but just pointing out the fact of the situation.

As for allowing gays to marry, your other examples really are not the same thing. Polygamy involves multiple people marrying or one person marrying more than one person. Gays are not asking for this. Gays are also not wanting or asking for the right to marry their pets. What they want, is the right to marry the one person they love, which happens to be someone of the same sex, and the reason they are of the same sex is because that is how they were made. The Church may not like it, but here is the fact; with some people, God fucked up. God made these people gay, so we ought to let them marry.

Now I know everyone of the religious nutjobs is going to tell me I'm full of shit, that gays choose their lifestyle. Bottom line is if you know many gay people, then you will know that they did not choose that lifestyle; it was chosen for them.

Bottom line about gay marriage is that I do not support gay marriage. I support the right of gay people to marry. The difference being that not everyone should be forced to marry a gay person.

So if a mother loves a son and both adults, should they be allowed to marry? If a brother and sister want to marry, should they be allowed?

Hyperbole to justify bigotry is still bigotry.

Try to keep up. The issue was not your bigotry but your hypocrisy and inconsistency.

 

[Vidi]

I am a historian. You are a liar.

No. You are a poor historian. One that lets your own predjudices blind you to the truth. You have to whitewash history so that it fits into your worldview rather than let it inform you.

You can throw your little tantrum and call names all you want, but the TRUTH will not be silenced by the likes of you. The likes of you found ways to justify slavery and segregation and lynching and miscegenation laws. The likes of you quoted scripture and demanded that civilized society demanded your close minded bigoted views must be upheld as absolute. The likes of you have always and will always oppose progress from the dark into the light, from bigotry into tolerance, from slavery to freedom. The likes of you pay lip service to the ideals of our country but when push comes to shove, you desecrate the values of freedom and liberty for ALL. The likes of you made claims that the "foundation of human society" was built upon your small minded worldview and yours alone.

The likes of you are wrong.

You're really pretty pathetic and sad.

No. I stand behind my belief system. When I say I believe in freedom and liberty, I mean it and my stance on EVERY issue is dictated by it.

You on the other hand cannot say the same. You CANNOT hold freedom and liberty as high values and then stand ready to keep it from those you disagree with. It only matters of it is available to ALL. Only then do those words actually mean something. Anything less is not freedom.

 

[Vidi]

So if a mother loves a son and both adults, should they be allowed to marry? If a brother and sister want to marry, should they be allowed?

Hyperbole to justify bigotry is still bigotry.

Try to keep up. The issue was not your bigotry but your hypocrisy and inconsistency.

Wrong again. See my previous post.

 

[Artevelde]

No. You are a poor historian. One that lets your own predjudices blind you to the truth. You have to whitewash history so that it fits into your worldview rather than let it inform you.

You can throw your little tantrum and call names all you want, but the TRUTH will not be silenced by the likes of you. The likes of you found ways to justify slavery and segregation and lynching and miscegenation laws. The likes of you quoted scripture and demanded that civilized society demanded your close minded bigoted views must be upheld as absolute. The likes of you have always and will always oppose progress from the dark into the light, from bigotry into tolerance, from slavery to freedom. The likes of you pay lip service to the ideals of our country but when push comes to shove, you desecrate the values of freedom and liberty for ALL. The likes of you made claims that the "foundation of human society" was built upon your small minded worldview and yours alone.

The likes of you are wrong.

You're really pretty pathetic and sad.

No. I stand behind my belief system. When I say I believe in freedom and liberty, I mean it and my stance on EVERY issue is dictated by it.

You on the other hand cannot say the same. You CANNOT hold freedom and liberty as high values and then stand ready to keep it from those you disagree with. It only matters of it is available to ALL. Only then do those words actually mean something. Anything less is not freedom.

You are clearly to stupid to even comprehend concepts like freedom, liberty and right.

 

[Papageorgio]

But you are okay with government paying welfare payments to support those kids, right? Just saying, in the end, abortion cuts down on unwanted children that become a burden to the system and taxpayers. I'm not using it as an argument supporting abortion but just pointing out the fact of the situation.

As for allowing gays to marry, your other examples really are not the same thing. Polygamy involves multiple people marrying or one person marrying more than one person. Gays are not asking for this. Gays are also not wanting or asking for the right to marry their pets. What they want, is the right to marry the one person they love, which happens to be someone of the same sex, and the reason they are of the same sex is because that is how they were made. The Church may not like it, but here is the fact; with some people, God fucked up. God made these people gay, so we ought to let them marry.

Now I know everyone of the religious nutjobs is going to tell me I'm full of shit, that gays choose their lifestyle. Bottom line is if you know many gay people, then you will know that they did not choose that lifestyle; it was chosen for them.

Bottom line about gay marriage is that I do not support gay marriage. I support the right of gay people to marry. The difference being that not everyone should be forced to marry a gay person.

So if a mother loves a son and both adults, should they be allowed to marry? If a brother and sister want to marry, should they be allowed?

Hyperbole to justify bigotry is still bigotry.

What bigotry? If gays want to marry, then fine by me, it is a state issue.

I am asking why two people in love, a mother and a son or a brother and a sister in love, cannot marry? The criteria set forth is two people in love, they are in love, what is wrong with it?

 

[Lakhota]

So if a mother loves a son and both adults, should they be allowed to marry? If a brother and sister want to marry, should they be allowed?

Hyperbole to justify bigotry is still bigotry.

What bigotry? If gays want to marry, then fine by me, it is a state issue.

I am asking why two people in love, a mother and a son or a brother and a sister in love, cannot marry? The criteria set forth is two people in love, they are in love, what is wrong with it?

Because that produces retarded offspring. Surely you know about that...

 

[Artevelde]

Hyperbole to justify bigotry is still bigotry.

What bigotry? If gays want to marry, then fine by me, it is a state issue.

I am asking why two people in love, a mother and a son or a brother and a sister in love, cannot marry? The criteria set forth is two people in love, they are in love, what is wrong with it?

Because that produces retarded offspring. Surely you know about that...

So the right to marry is conditioned by the ability to produce healthy children?

 

[LoneLaugher]

So if a mother loves a son and both adults, should they be allowed to marry? If a brother and sister want to marry, should they be allowed?

Hyperbole to justify bigotry is still bigotry.

What bigotry? If gays want to marry, then fine by me, it is a state issue.

I am asking why two people in love, a mother and a son or a brother and a sister in love, cannot marry? The criteria set forth is two people in love, they are in love, what is wrong with it?

Holy shit! You have done it. You have busted this whole argument about gay marriage wide open! You have cornered every proponent of gay marriage........and given them no choice but to either change their mind or come out in support of mothers marrying their sons! Brilliant!

Now....all you have to do is round up the millions of mother/son couples who are seeking marriage licenses and start a movement! That should be no problem. They are everywhere!

 

[Vidi]

You're really pretty pathetic and sad.

No. I stand behind my belief system. When I say I believe in freedom and liberty, I mean it and my stance on EVERY issue is dictated by it.

You on the other hand cannot say the same. You CANNOT hold freedom and liberty as high values and then stand ready to keep it from those you disagree with. It only matters of it is available to ALL. Only then do those words actually mean something. Anything less is not freedom.

You are clearly to stupid to even comprehend concepts like freedom, liberty and right.

If you advocate oppression, you have no right to lay claim to freedom and liberty.

 

[Vidi]

What bigotry? If gays want to marry, then fine by me, it is a state issue.

I am asking why two people in love, a mother and a son or a brother and a sister in love, cannot marry? The criteria set forth is two people in love, they are in love, what is wrong with it?

Because that produces retarded offspring. Surely you know about that...

So the right to marry is conditioned by the ability to produce healthy children?

There is no right to marry. It's a choice to marry.

However, if the government chooses to give privileges to those who marry, then those privileges must be available to any consenting adults who choose to marry.

To do less is discriminatory.

 

[Artevelde]

No. I stand behind my belief system. When I say I believe in freedom and liberty, I mean it and my stance on EVERY issue is dictated by it.

You on the other hand cannot say the same. You CANNOT hold freedom and liberty as high values and then stand ready to keep it from those you disagree with. It only matters of it is available to ALL. Only then do those words actually mean something. Anything less is not freedom.

You are clearly to stupid to even comprehend concepts like freedom, liberty and right.

If you advocate oppression, you have no right to lay claim to freedom and liberty.

Fine by me, since I don't advocate oppression. But actually, if you look in the constitution you will find no such exclusion. Must be your typical hypocrisy.