It is confirmed.........Trump is a retard

[bripat9643]

The real issue is whether gay marriage is a moral right. It clearly isn't. You certainly don't believe it is because you just said it wasn't. You don't believe in moral rights. You only believe in legal rights.

You are correct, there is no such thing as a moral right.

So no injustice was done when slavery was the law of the land?

Of course an injustice was done, people have an inalienable right to freedom, not a moral right to it.

That's the same thing, dipshit.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I'm not asking you why an individual might want it. I'm asking what the social purpose is.
As I said, the social purpose of marraige is to provide a healthy nurturing environment for children until they reach adulthood. Any other claims are pure moonshine.

If that is the social purpose of marriage, why do marriages not end when the last child hits adulthood, as they no longer serve a purpose?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The real issue is whether gay marriage is a moral right. It clearly isn't. You certainly don't believe it is because you just said it wasn't. You don't believe in moral rights. You only believe in legal rights.

You are correct, there is no such thing as a moral right.

So no injustice was done when slavery was the law of the land?

Of course an injustice was done, people have an inalienable right to freedom, not a moral right to it.

That's the same thing, dipshit.

Not in the least. Morals are a human construct that change from society to society and age to age.

An inalienable right never changes

According to the religious text of the Christians there is nothing wrong with slavery at all, in fact there are rules for it.

 

[Faun]

Sorry, turd, but the applied equally before the SC upset the applecart. Every man and woman in this country was able to get married. If rights are whatever the law says, then if it says queers can't marry someone of the same sex, then they don't have such a right.

”Every man and woman in this country was able to get married.”

Fucking moron... again... heterosexuals could marry the person they love; homosexuals could not. There is no compelling reason for such discrimination. And since marriage is a fundamental right, the Supreme Court decided gays should have equal access towards that fundamental right to legally marry the person of their choice.

Sadly, you’re simply not bright enough to grasp any of that.

The compelling reason for such discrimination is that gay people make people like bripat9643 and p@triot uncomfortable. Everyone has to think like them and look like them and act like them. And they will fight to make that happen till the day they die and the rest of the country celebrates the death of a bigot

The compelling reason is that marriage exists to facilitate the reproduction of the species. Homosexuality is a threat to the continuation of the species. The law shouldn't be promoting something that is a threat to our species.

Nope, that’s not the reason marriage exists nor does it become the reason marriage exists because a fucking moron like you is simply too retarded to know any better.

Of course it is. If it wasn't for sex and reproduction, marriage wouldn't exist. The fact is so obvious that you have to be suffering brain damage to deny it. If people didn't reproduce, then what would be the point of marriage?

Prove it.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

”Every man and woman in this country was able to get married.”

Fucking moron... again... heterosexuals could marry the person they love; homosexuals could not. There is no compelling reason for such discrimination. And since marriage is a fundamental right, the Supreme Court decided gays should have equal access towards that fundamental right to legally marry the person of their choice.

Sadly, you’re simply not bright enough to grasp any of that.

The compelling reason for such discrimination is that gay people make people like bripat9643 and p@triot uncomfortable. Everyone has to think like them and look like them and act like them. And they will fight to make that happen till the day they die and the rest of the country celebrates the death of a bigot

The compelling reason is that marriage exists to facilitate the reproduction of the species. Homosexuality is a threat to the continuation of the species. The law shouldn't be promoting something that is a threat to our species.

Nope, that’s not the reason marriage exists nor does it become the reason marriage exists because a fucking moron like you is simply too retarded to know any better.

Of course it is. If it wasn't for sex and reproduction, marriage wouldn't exist. The fact is so obvious that you have to be suffering brain damage to deny it. If people didn't reproduce, then what would be the point of marriage?

Prove it.

Actually, if marriage was about nothing but reproduction, then polygamy would be a much better system for pumping out babies. Maybe bripat9643 is a Mormon and has a whole bunch of wives

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not asking you why an individual might want it. I'm asking what the social purpose is.
As I said, the social purpose of marraige is to provide a healthy nurturing environment for children until they reach adulthood. Any other claims are pure moonshine.

If that is the social purpose of marriage, why do marriages not end when the last child hits adulthood, as they no longer serve a purpose?

Don't pretend to be such a fucking dumbass. For one thing, terminating the marriage the minute the children leave home could have dire consequences for the mother. entering a relationship in which she knew she would get tossed into the cold would obviously discourage women from entering into such an arrangement. Furthermore people take a hand in helping to raise their grandchildren.

I could go on and on about how stupid your question is, but I just don't know why I bother. I've answered such dumbass questions a thousand times, but the queer lobby still thinks they are clever.

 

[bripat9643]

”Every man and woman in this country was able to get married.”

Fucking moron... again... heterosexuals could marry the person they love; homosexuals could not. There is no compelling reason for such discrimination. And since marriage is a fundamental right, the Supreme Court decided gays should have equal access towards that fundamental right to legally marry the person of their choice.

Sadly, you’re simply not bright enough to grasp any of that.

The compelling reason for such discrimination is that gay people make people like bripat9643 and p@triot uncomfortable. Everyone has to think like them and look like them and act like them. And they will fight to make that happen till the day they die and the rest of the country celebrates the death of a bigot

The compelling reason is that marriage exists to facilitate the reproduction of the species. Homosexuality is a threat to the continuation of the species. The law shouldn't be promoting something that is a threat to our species.

Nope, that’s not the reason marriage exists nor does it become the reason marriage exists because a fucking moron like you is simply too retarded to know any better.

Of course it is. If it wasn't for sex and reproduction, marriage wouldn't exist. The fact is so obvious that you have to be suffering brain damage to deny it. If people didn't reproduce, then what would be the point of marriage?

Prove it.

I don't need to. It's self evident.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I'm not asking you why an individual might want it. I'm asking what the social purpose is.
As I said, the social purpose of marraige is to provide a healthy nurturing environment for children until they reach adulthood. Any other claims are pure moonshine.

If that is the social purpose of marriage, why do marriages not end when the last child hits adulthood, as they no longer serve a purpose?

Don't pretend to be such a fucking dumbass. For one thing, terminating the marriage the minute the children leave home could have dire consequences for the mother. entering a relationship in which she knew she would get tossed into the cold would obviously discourage women from entering into such and arrangement. Furthermore people take a hand in helping to raise their grandchildren.

I could go on and on about how stupid your question is, but I just don't know what I bother. I've answered such dumbass questions a thousand times, but the queer lobby still thinks they are clever.

So, what you are saying is that marriage is about more than just raising children to adulthood.

Glad you admitted it.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[bripat9643]

The compelling reason for such discrimination is that gay people make people like bripat9643 and p@triot uncomfortable. Everyone has to think like them and look like them and act like them. And they will fight to make that happen till the day they die and the rest of the country celebrates the death of a bigot

The compelling reason is that marriage exists to facilitate the reproduction of the species. Homosexuality is a threat to the continuation of the species. The law shouldn't be promoting something that is a threat to our species.

Nope, that’s not the reason marriage exists nor does it become the reason marriage exists because a fucking moron like you is simply too retarded to know any better.

Of course it is. If it wasn't for sex and reproduction, marriage wouldn't exist. The fact is so obvious that you have to be suffering brain damage to deny it. If people didn't reproduce, then what would be the point of marriage?

Prove it.

Actually, if marriage was about nothing but reproduction, then polygamy would be a much better system for pumping out babies. Maybe bripat9643 is a Mormon and has a whole bunch of wives

Polygamy is detrimental to society because that leaves a lot of males without mates. Such societies have proven to be extremely violent. Males without wives or children have little stake in their societies.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not asking you why an individual might want it. I'm asking what the social purpose is.
As I said, the social purpose of marraige is to provide a healthy nurturing environment for children until they reach adulthood. Any other claims are pure moonshine.

If that is the social purpose of marriage, why do marriages not end when the last child hits adulthood, as they no longer serve a purpose?

Don't pretend to be such a fucking dumbass. For one thing, terminating the marriage the minute the children leave home could have dire consequences for the mother. entering a relationship in which she knew she would get tossed into the cold would obviously discourage women from entering into such and arrangement. Furthermore people take a hand in helping to raise their grandchildren.

I could go on and on about how stupid your question is, but I just don't know what I bother. I've answered such dumbass questions a thousand times, but the queer lobby still thinks they are clever.

So, what you are saying is that marriage is about more than just raising children to adulthood.

Glad you admitted it.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

No I'm not. I'm saying it's not as simplistic as you're trying to make it.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I'm not asking you why an individual might want it. I'm asking what the social purpose is.
As I said, the social purpose of marraige is to provide a healthy nurturing environment for children until they reach adulthood. Any other claims are pure moonshine.

If that is the social purpose of marriage, why do marriages not end when the last child hits adulthood, as they no longer serve a purpose?

Don't pretend to be such a fucking dumbass. For one thing, terminating the marriage the minute the children leave home could have dire consequences for the mother. entering a relationship in which she knew she would get tossed into the cold would obviously discourage women from entering into such and arrangement. Furthermore people take a hand in helping to raise their grandchildren.

I could go on and on about how stupid your question is, but I just don't know what I bother. I've answered such dumbass questions a thousand times, but the queer lobby still thinks they are clever.

So, what you are saying is that marriage is about more than just raising children to adulthood.

Glad you admitted it.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

No I'm not. I'm saying it's not as simplistic as you're trying to make it.

So, is marriage about making babies or is it about other things. Please make up your mind


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

Then it’s not a law. All federal laws are designated with a number.

Thanks for once again admitting you’re a fucking moron.

So are you saying that states can reserve marriage to a couple consisting of two genders?

<smh>

I’m saying you’re a fucking moron. You prove it with virtually every post.

That's our subsitite for logic, apparently.

LOLOL

You’re not posting logic. You’re posting homophobic nonsense.

You're posting queer propaganda, which is pure nonsense. It's hilarious that a guy who claims marriage has nothing to do with reproduction would accuse me of posting nonsense. There has never been a more nonsensical claim posted to this forum than that. Of course, when you defend gay marriage, you are defending an oxymoron, so it's inevitable that you will post nonsense.

Sadly, you're lying again. I never said, "marriage has nothing to do with reproduction."

I said reproduction is not the reason marriage exists.

You lose.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not asking you why an individual might want it. I'm asking what the social purpose is.
As I said, the social purpose of marraige is to provide a healthy nurturing environment for children until they reach adulthood. Any other claims are pure moonshine.

If that is the social purpose of marriage, why do marriages not end when the last child hits adulthood, as they no longer serve a purpose?

Don't pretend to be such a fucking dumbass. For one thing, terminating the marriage the minute the children leave home could have dire consequences for the mother. entering a relationship in which she knew she would get tossed into the cold would obviously discourage women from entering into such and arrangement. Furthermore people take a hand in helping to raise their grandchildren.

I could go on and on about how stupid your question is, but I just don't know what I bother. I've answered such dumbass questions a thousand times, but the queer lobby still thinks they are clever.

So, what you are saying is that marriage is about more than just raising children to adulthood.

Glad you admitted it.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

No I'm not. I'm saying it's not as simplistic as you're trying to make it.

So, is marriage about making babies or is it about other things. Please make up your mind


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

All those other things are also about raising healthy children, dipshit.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The compelling reason is that marriage exists to facilitate the reproduction of the species. Homosexuality is a threat to the continuation of the species. The law shouldn't be promoting something that is a threat to our species.

Nope, that’s not the reason marriage exists nor does it become the reason marriage exists because a fucking moron like you is simply too retarded to know any better.

Of course it is. If it wasn't for sex and reproduction, marriage wouldn't exist. The fact is so obvious that you have to be suffering brain damage to deny it. If people didn't reproduce, then what would be the point of marriage?

Prove it.

Actually, if marriage was about nothing but reproduction, then polygamy would be a much better system for pumping out babies. Maybe bripat9643 is a Mormon and has a whole bunch of wives

Polygamy is detrimental to society because that leaves a lot of males without mates. Such societies have proven to be extremely violent. Males without wives or children have little stake in their societies.

Monogamy is terribly inefficient at pumping out babies. There is a years down time while the male is being wasted with each baby.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[bripat9643]

So are you saying that states can reserve marriage to a couple consisting of two genders?

<smh>

I’m saying you’re a fucking moron. You prove it with virtually every post.

That's our subsitite for logic, apparently.

LOLOL

You’re not posting logic. You’re posting homophobic nonsense.

You're posting queer propaganda, which is pure nonsense. It's hilarious that a guy who claims marriage has nothing to do with reproduction would accuse me of posting nonsense. There has never been a more nonsensical claim posted to this forum than that. Of course, when you defend gay marriage, you are defending an oxymoron, so it's inevitable that you will post nonsense.

Sadly, you're lying again. I never said, "marriage has nothing to do with reproduction."

I said reproduction is not the reason marriage exists.

You lose.

Just as stupid and wrong.

 

[bripat9643]

Nope, that’s not the reason marriage exists nor does it become the reason marriage exists because a fucking moron like you is simply too retarded to know any better.

Of course it is. If it wasn't for sex and reproduction, marriage wouldn't exist. The fact is so obvious that you have to be suffering brain damage to deny it. If people didn't reproduce, then what would be the point of marriage?

Prove it.

Actually, if marriage was about nothing but reproduction, then polygamy would be a much better system for pumping out babies. Maybe bripat9643 is a Mormon and has a whole bunch of wives

Polygamy is detrimental to society because that leaves a lot of males without mates. Such societies have proven to be extremely violent. Males without wives or children have little stake in their societies.

Monogamy is terribly inefficient at pumping out babies. There is a years down time while the male is being wasted with each baby.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Tribes constantly making war on each other isn't exactly good for children, moron.

 

[Faun]

The compelling reason for such discrimination is that gay people make people like bripat9643 and p@triot uncomfortable. Everyone has to think like them and look like them and act like them. And they will fight to make that happen till the day they die and the rest of the country celebrates the death of a bigot

The compelling reason is that marriage exists to facilitate the reproduction of the species. Homosexuality is a threat to the continuation of the species. The law shouldn't be promoting something that is a threat to our species.

Nope, that’s not the reason marriage exists nor does it become the reason marriage exists because a fucking moron like you is simply too retarded to know any better.

Of course it is. If it wasn't for sex and reproduction, marriage wouldn't exist. The fact is so obvious that you have to be suffering brain damage to deny it. If people didn't reproduce, then what would be the point of marriage?

Prove it.

I don't need to. It's self evident.

LOLOLOLOL

 

[Faun]

<smh>

I’m saying you’re a fucking moron. You prove it with virtually every post.

That's our subsitite for logic, apparently.

LOLOL

You’re not posting logic. You’re posting homophobic nonsense.

You're posting queer propaganda, which is pure nonsense. It's hilarious that a guy who claims marriage has nothing to do with reproduction would accuse me of posting nonsense. There has never been a more nonsensical claim posted to this forum than that. Of course, when you defend gay marriage, you are defending an oxymoron, so it's inevitable that you will post nonsense.

Sadly, you're lying again. I never said, "marriage has nothing to do with reproduction."

I said reproduction is not the reason marriage exists.

You lose.

Just as stupid and wrong.

Nope, you conceded when you lied about my position and failed miserably to prove your own.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Of course it is. If it wasn't for sex and reproduction, marriage wouldn't exist. The fact is so obvious that you have to be suffering brain damage to deny it. If people didn't reproduce, then what would be the point of marriage?

Prove it.

Actually, if marriage was about nothing but reproduction, then polygamy would be a much better system for pumping out babies. Maybe bripat9643 is a Mormon and has a whole bunch of wives

Polygamy is detrimental to society because that leaves a lot of males without mates. Such societies have proven to be extremely violent. Males without wives or children have little stake in their societies.

Monogamy is terribly inefficient at pumping out babies. There is a years down time while the male is being wasted with each baby.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Tribes constantly making war on each other isn't exactly good for children, moron.

It weeds out the weak and ineffective...makes for a stronger society.




Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[bripat9643]

That's our subsitite for logic, apparently.

LOLOL

You’re not posting logic. You’re posting homophobic nonsense.

You're posting queer propaganda, which is pure nonsense. It's hilarious that a guy who claims marriage has nothing to do with reproduction would accuse me of posting nonsense. There has never been a more nonsensical claim posted to this forum than that. Of course, when you defend gay marriage, you are defending an oxymoron, so it's inevitable that you will post nonsense.

Sadly, you're lying again. I never said, "marriage has nothing to do with reproduction."

I said reproduction is not the reason marriage exists.

You lose.

Just as stupid and wrong.

Nope, you conceded when you lied about my position and failed miserably to prove your own.

You have a vivid imagination. I did nothing of the sort.