Procreation and Marriage: A Poll

[Seawytch]

There have been quite a few posts in the last few weeks going on and on about how gays cannot naturally procreate. Some posters have even hung their entire anti-gay marriage argument on the procreation issue. However no one can show any state requirement of procreation-ability to obtain a marriage license.

Ok, Procreation-ability. Having children the "natural" way. Not everyone can procreate naturally for one reason or another. Those who don't want children continue on with their lives as a childless couple. Those who want children have them in other ways....invitro, surrogate, adoption.

My poll is about those people.....are they worthy of legal marriage or not. Vote. Thank you in advance.

A legal marriage?

As far as I'm concerned the concept of same sex couple being "married" is as absurd as someone wanting to "marry" an alpaca. Children are of no consequence regarding marriage IMO. Since the dawn of time it has been a union of males and females (humans to be clear). Why modern bed wetters are so dedicated to this issue is no surprise however, since perverting the norms of our society is the policy of the left.

I personally don't care though. If carpet munchers and butt pirates want to "play house" like kindergarteners, it really doesn't affect me. It's deviant and stupid, but WTF do I care? What does piss me off is that I'm supposed to embrace it. Somehow there's something wrong with me if I call it what it is... perversion. Why is it so important that such an insignificant percentage of our population gains absolute acceptance from the rest of us because they choose or are otherwise compelled to be queer? If it is so normal and natural to be a pillow biter there wouldn't be this compulsion to have the rest of society scared to even question it.

There is obviously something wrong with being queer, that's why it's called QUEER!!! If the goddamned queers were really so confident that there was nothing wrong with them, they wouldn't demand special attention. Clearly they're aware of the fact that there is something wrong with THEM, or they wouldn't be so hell bent on forcing the rest of society to embrace them, accept them or even STFU about their stupid marriage cause.

Another thing while I'm ranting about these deviants.

Why do homos define themselves by their sexuality? Why is that aspect of life so important to them? They're consumed with sex, more so than any hetero I know. Get back in the closet already you sick fuckers. We hoped the Anally Inflicted Death Sentence (AIDS) would be enough, but you assholes are like a fungus that just won't go away.

No, we aren't going back in the closet and yes, we are getting legally married. You can "pretend" that gays aren't legally marrying in 19 states but they are and the Federal Government is recognizing those legal marriages.

You will die a bitter, angry old man who rails against the world for all the ills you think you've suffered. In the meantime, gays will happily be marrying and living their lives without a single regard for you and how you feel about them.

 

[Pete7469]

England has the 1st Amendment? Who knew? (apparently not you....)

We already have businesses being sued because they wont cater to the fags. Adding churches to the list is hardly far-fetched. 1A didnt protect business.

A business is not a church and must abide by the Public Accommodation laws of the locality in which they operate. None of the localities sued were "gay marriage" states.

Since it is "only a matter of time", please list all the churches that have been successfully sued to perform interracial or interfaith marriages.

Here's your sign:

And here's you link bed wetter:

Couple suing to force church to perform gay marriage - Illinois Review




It has begun. We knew it would eventually.

 

[Seawytch]

We already have businesses being sued because they wont cater to the fags. Adding churches to the list is hardly far-fetched. 1A didnt protect business.

A business is not a church and must abide by the Public Accommodation laws of the locality in which they operate. None of the localities sued were "gay marriage" states.

Since it is "only a matter of time", please list all the churches that have been successfully sued to perform interracial or interfaith marriages.

And here's you link bed wetter:[/COLOR]

Couple suing to force church to perform gay marriage - Illinois Review

It has begun. We knew it would eventually.

Yes, the bed is often wet but not from what your weird golden shower fantasies surmised.

You didn't read your link did you? You thought that because it came from Illinois that it was about Illinois? That's about England. Does England have a 1st Amendment? No?

 

[Pete7469]

No, we aren't going back in the closet and yes, we are getting legally married. You can "pretend" that gays aren't legally marrying in 19 states but they are and the Federal Government is recognizing those legal marriages.

You will die a bitter, angry old man who rails against the world for all the ills you think you've suffered. In the meantime, gays will happily be marrying and living their lives without a single regard for you and how you feel about them.

No, you're getting courts to rule in your favor.

Queer weddings have been banned by laws at every level. The left has spent millions in legal fees to overturn these laws in spite of having no real legal basis.

Like I said though, I don't really give a fuck. If you insipid assholes want to pool your assets into a legally binding arrangement only to have a couple lawyers siphon %30 or more from you after you realize you hate each other so be it.

Queer marriage isn't the issue to me, it's your insistence that I either accept it, or as a punishment karma will somehow see to it I die miserable and alone. From the tone of your response I suspect you're already miserable and alone, because you're so butthurt about how some anonymous poster on a message board feels about you.

 

[Pete7469]

A business is not a church and must abide by the Public Accommodation laws of the locality in which they operate. None of the localities sued were "gay marriage" states.

Since it is "only a matter of time", please list all the churches that have been successfully sued to perform interracial or interfaith marriages.

And here's you link bed wetter:[/COLOR]

Couple suing to force church to perform gay marriage - Illinois Review

It has begun. We knew it would eventually.

Yes, the bed is often wet but not from what your weird golden shower fantasies surmised.

You didn't read your link did you? You thought that because it came from Illinois that it was about Illinois? That's about England. Does England have a 1st Amendment? No?

Incontinence can be dealt with though therapy, so can your paranoid delusions.



http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2007/aug/07082104

 

[Seawytch]

No, we aren't going back in the closet and yes, we are getting legally married. You can "pretend" that gays aren't legally marrying in 19 states but they are and the Federal Government is recognizing those legal marriages.

You will die a bitter, angry old man who rails against the world for all the ills you think you've suffered. In the meantime, gays will happily be marrying and living their lives without a single regard for you and how you feel about them.

No, you're getting courts to rule in your favor.

Queer weddings have been banned by laws at every level. The left has spent millions in legal fees to overturn these laws in spite of having no real legal basis.

Like I said though, I don't really give a fuck. If you insipid assholes want to pool your assets into a legally binding arrangement only to have a couple lawyers siphon %30 or more from you after you realize you hate each other so be it.

Queer marriage isn't the issue to me, it's your insistence that I either accept it, or as a punishment karma will somehow see to it I die miserable and alone. From the tone of your response I suspect you're already miserable and alone, because you're so butthurt about how some anonymous poster on a message board feels about you.

Yes, we are addressing our grievances in court...the way the framers intended.

I don't care if you accept it. You don't have to "accept" it, you just have to deal with it.

Actually, no, I'm not miserable nor am I alone...although I wish I was alone sometimes. Seems I never get the house to myself, ever...but I digress.

Your post came across as angry and bitter. I do apologize if I misinterpreted it somehow. You do seem divorced though...but I could be reading into your " only to have a couple lawyers siphon %30 or more from you after you realize you hate each other so be it." (and I'm assuming you meant 30% not %30.) and, again, I'm very sorry for your pain.

I happened to have met my soul mate and we've been together 18 1/2 years...married since 2008. Since last year, that civil marriage has meant a lot to us, especially since I'm a military retiree. It gave me a great deal of peace of mind to know that the military would still be taking care of my family in the event of my untimely demise.

 

[Derideo_Te]

A business is not a church and must abide by the Public Accommodation laws of the locality in which they operate. None of the localities sued were "gay marriage" states.

Since it is "only a matter of time", please list all the churches that have been successfully sued to perform interracial or interfaith marriages.

And here's you link bed wetter:[/COLOR]

Couple suing to force church to perform gay marriage - Illinois Review

It has begun. We knew it would eventually.

Yes, the bed is often wet but not from what your weird golden shower fantasies surmised.

You didn't read your link did you? You thought that because it came from Illinois that it was about Illinois? That's about England. Does England have a 1st Amendment? No?

Pete is as sharp as a bowling ball!

The Church of England is the state endorsed religion and therefore there is a legitimate challenge to its' discrimination. (Personally I hope the Queen steps in and allows gay marriage.) In the USA the separation of church and state ensures that churches will be allowed to be bigoted in the same way that the Boy Scouts have been.

However there are enlightened churches that don't discriminate and more power to them for recognizing their sins of the past and taking steps to alter their practices. (Bad pun, I know! )

 

[Seawytch]

And here's you link bed wetter:[/COLOR]

Couple suing to force church to perform gay marriage - Illinois Review

It has begun. We knew it would eventually.

Yes, the bed is often wet but not from what your weird golden shower fantasies surmised.

You didn't read your link did you? You thought that because it came from Illinois that it was about Illinois? That's about England. Does England have a 1st Amendment? No?

Incontinence can be dealt with though therapy, so can your paranoid delusions.


http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2007/aug/07082104

See, there you go again, injecting your fantasies into my private life. My continence is fine, it's not urine that gets our bed wet.

Sorry, that's also not a church being forced to perform a ceremony against the tenants of their faith. That is a church who rents out their facility to the public and must therefore abide by that localities public accommodation laws. Done flailing? No church will ever be successfully sued to perform a ceremony against the tenants of the faith...or they would have been already by an interfaith or interracial couple.

 

[Plasmaball]

Sex is the traditional way to consummate a marriage, since gay can only engage in sodomy the marriage can't be consummated. Simple biological fact.

you must have some boring sex then...

I don't advertise what goes on in my bedroom, if only the faghadist felt the same.

I know what you mean..I never see any hetro sex stuff out in the open..like ever...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sex is the traditional way to consummate a marriage, since gay can only engage in sodomy the marriage can't be consummated. Simple biological fact.

You need to adjust to the future, not the future to you.

 

[WorldWatcher]

That is a church...

The OGCMA is NOT a Church. They are a non-profit civic organization. Calling them a Church perpetuates mis-information.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

And here's you link bed wetter:[/COLOR]

Couple suing to force church to perform gay marriage - Illinois Review

It has begun. We knew it would eventually.

Yes, the bed is often wet but not from what your weird golden shower fantasies surmised.

You didn't read your link did you? You thought that because it came from Illinois that it was about Illinois? That's about England. Does England have a 1st Amendment? No?

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2007/aug/07082104

4. No "Church" was sued for refusing to perform a ceremony. The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Assassination is a Non-Profit community organization that administers property in Ocean Grove Jew Jersey. They voluntarily participated in a program called the "Green Acres" program that allowed for State relief from property taxes on the condition that the property be open to the public. The pavilion in question was on the beach front boardwalk. Over the many years the OGCMA had enjoyed the tax relief from property taxes they had to periodically renew the application for the exemption and each time certified that it that it would be open to the public.. So the link fails on multiple levels:

A. The OGCMA is NOT a Church.
B. The OGCMA was not challenged on religious grounds, they were challenged based on their own commitment that the property would be open to the public something they had attested to mulitple times to receive the special tax exemption.
C. The OGCMA was NOT asked to perform the religious ceremony.
D. No priest, pastor, reverend of a Church was asked to perform a ceremony against their religious faith.
E. The action was not based on religious faith, the action was based on the OGCMA violating the rules to which they voluntarily agreed.​

State of New Jersey


>>>>

 

[Seawytch]

That is a church...

The OGCMA is NOT a Church. They are a non-profit civic organization. Calling them a Church perpetuates mus-information.


>>>>

I stand corrected. Thanks, Chief.

 

[Unkotare]

Marriage is about choosing who you want to spend your life with. As long as it is another consenting adult then that is all that matters.

Parenthood is about raising children. Anyone can become a parent without necessarily being married. Single people can adopt or use in vitro methods.

So the argument that marriage is about procreation is null and void.

but it suits the purpose of certain people who think they should impose their religious beliefs on the rest of us.

Why did you feel the need to inject "religious beliefs" into your response?

 

[Pete7469]

Yes, we are addressing our grievances in court...the way the framers intended.

I don't care if you accept it. You don't have to "accept" it, you just have to deal with it.

Actually, no, I'm not miserable nor am I alone...although I wish I was alone sometimes. Seems I never get the house to myself, ever...but I digress.

Your post came across as angry and bitter. I do apologize if I misinterpreted it somehow. You do seem divorced though...but I could be reading into your " only to have a couple lawyers siphon %30 or more from you after you realize you hate each other so be it." (and I'm assuming you meant 30% not %30.) and, again, I'm very sorry for your pain.

I happened to have met my soul mate and we've been together 18 1/2 years...married since 2008. Since last year, that civil marriage has meant a lot to us, especially since I'm a military retiree. It gave me a great deal of peace of mind to know that the military would still be taking care of my family in the event of my untimely demise.

I always fuck up the % thing.

Indeed I have been divorced, but there were zero assets to lose any percentage of. I appreciate your concern but I celebrate my severance from that succubus.

Now I can honestly appreciate the concern of couples of any sort to protect their combined interests. Frankly I have no problem at all with your spouse sharing your entitlements since you've earned them. I think you should have every right enjoyed by hetero-married couples. Again that isn't the issue I have with GM.

See, there you go again, injecting your fantasies into my private life. My continence is fine, it's not urine that gets our bed wet.

Sorry, that's also not a church being forced to perform a ceremony against the tenants of their faith. That is a church who rents out their facility to the public and must therefore abide by that localities public accommodation laws. Done flailing? No church will ever be successfully sued to perform a ceremony against the tenants of the faith...or they would have been already by an interfaith or interracial couple.

Uhhh... yeah we don't need to get into anything regarding moisture on our mattresses in the realm of coitus recreation. The issue is psychological issues characterized by many liberals who may also have symptoms similar to those of bradley manning.

It is still a church who's property is... THEIR PROPERTY.

It's no different in my mind to a bakery that refused to service a gay wedding. They should not be forced by government to service people.

I know it sucks, but there are still some white assholes out there who would like to keep black people out of their stores. I'm also sure there are black assholes who would like to keep whites, jews, asians or any other classification of people out of their stores. I support their rights to be assholes. People do not have a right to be serviced by anyone.

It is up to the rest of us not to patronize such establishments.

 

[WorldWatcher]

That is a church...

The OGCMA is NOT a Church. They are a non-profit civic organization. Calling them a Church perpetuates mus-information.


>>>>

I stand corrected. Thanks, Chief.

No prob. If the termonolgy isn't corrected, then you hand them the claim based on a false premise.


>>>>

 

[Seawytch]

Yes, we are addressing our grievances in court...the way the framers intended.

I don't care if you accept it. You don't have to "accept" it, you just have to deal with it.

Actually, no, I'm not miserable nor am I alone...although I wish I was alone sometimes. Seems I never get the house to myself, ever...but I digress.

Your post came across as angry and bitter. I do apologize if I misinterpreted it somehow. You do seem divorced though...but I could be reading into your " only to have a couple lawyers siphon %30 or more from you after you realize you hate each other so be it." (and I'm assuming you meant 30% not %30.) and, again, I'm very sorry for your pain.

I happened to have met my soul mate and we've been together 18 1/2 years...married since 2008. Since last year, that civil marriage has meant a lot to us, especially since I'm a military retiree. It gave me a great deal of peace of mind to know that the military would still be taking care of my family in the event of my untimely demise.

I always fuck up the % thing.

Indeed I have been divorced, but there were zero assets to lose any percentage of. I appreciate your concern but I celebrate my severance from that succubus.

Now I can honestly appreciate the concern of couples of any sort to protect their combined interests. Frankly I have no problem at all with your spouse sharing your entitlements since you've earned them. I think you should have every right enjoyed by hetero-married couples. Again that isn't the issue I have with GM.

See, there you go again, injecting your fantasies into my private life. My continence is fine, it's not urine that gets our bed wet.

Sorry, that's also not a church being forced to perform a ceremony against the tenants of their faith. That is a church who rents out their facility to the public and must therefore abide by that localities public accommodation laws. Done flailing? No church will ever be successfully sued to perform a ceremony against the tenants of the faith...or they would have been already by an interfaith or interracial couple.

Uhhh... yeah we don't need to get into anything regarding moisture on our mattresses in the realm of coitus recreation. The issue is psychological issues characterized by many liberals who may also have symptoms similar to those of bradley manning.

It is still a church who's property is... THEIR PROPERTY.

It's no different in my mind to a bakery that refused to service a gay wedding. They should not be forced by government to service people.

I know it sucks, but there are still some white assholes out there who would like to keep black people out of their stores. I'm also sure there are black assholes who would like to keep whites, jews, asians or any other classification of people out of their stores. I support their rights to be assholes. People do not have a right to be serviced by anyone.

It is up to the rest of us not to patronize such establishments.

As Worldwatcher pointed out, they are not a church and even if they were, they signed a contract with the city to make their facilities available to the public. When you do that, you must abide by the public accommodation laws of the locality in which you operate.

Public accommodation laws have absolutely nothing to do with marriage equality. Feel free to strike them all down. If I can't discriminate against a religious bigot, he shouldn't be able to discriminate against me.

 

[WorldWatcher]

It is still a church who's property is... THEIR PROPERTY.

It's no different in my mind to a bakery that refused to service a gay wedding. They should not be forced by government to service people.

#1 It was not Church property.

#2 We agree, I support the repeal of Public Accommodation laws applied to non-government entities. The property owner should be able to refuse service based on any condition they choose, whether it be blacks, asians, jews, muslims, men, woman, Irish, Russians, etc. Public Accommodation laws should only apply to government entities and their business dealings.



>>>>

 

[Pete7469]

That is a church...

The OGCMA is NOT a Church. They are a non-profit civic organization. Calling them a Church perpetuates mus-information.


>>>>

I stand corrected. Thanks, Chief.

Ditto, thanks for setting things straight.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The OGCMA is NOT a Church. They are a non-profit civic organization. Calling them a Church perpetuates mus-information.


>>>>

I stand corrected. Thanks, Chief.

Ditto, thanks for setting things straight.

No problem. Thanks.


>>>>