What does your ID say about you?

[ChristianLibral]

Marriage as an institution is on the ropes in this country....we don't need to give it a death blow....

I don't feel it would be a death blow...but I could be wrong. How does letting gay's marry affect heterosexual couples marriages?

If people like j-lo and britney spears can be married for all of 15 minutes, why not let gays?

 

[ChristianLibral]

but let's not turn this into a gay marriage debate...unless you want to.

 

[jimnyc]

If people like j-lo and britney spears can be married for all of 15 minutes, why not let gays?

So your argument is that since there are already problems, that further problems should be acceptable? Nobody ever stated that those who marry for fun and then seek immediate annulment is acceptable. People should take marriage seriously, and allowing 2 members of the same sex to marry so they can add financial gain to their vile perversions is not a good way to go about it.

 

[ChristianLibral]

So your argument is that since there are already problems, that further problems should be acceptable? Nobody ever stated that those who marry for fun and then seek immediate annulment is acceptable. People should take marriage seriously, and allowing 2 members of the same sex to marry so they can add financial gain to their vile perversions is not a good way to go about it.

well it's only your opinion that gay marriage would be a problem, and the polls (other peoples OPINIONS are consistent with yours for the most part), but it hasn't happened yet so we can't know for sure.

I agree, people should take marriage seriously, so why is it that the divorce rate in this country is through the roof, seems to me people aren't taking it seriously already.

So are you saying that the only reason gays want to marry is so they can "add financial gain to their vile perversions"? Couldn't they possibly, just possibly be getting married because, oh, I don't know, because they love each other. Should they not be allowed to show their love too?

Tell me, are you in favor of calling it a civil union, but not marriage? Can they still get the same benifits heterosexual couples get when they marry?

 

[Said1]

I knew from your posts that you weren't a commie, I just didn't know if the avatar and ID had some "secret" meaning.

I have changed avatars a few times, the're usually a reflection of the mood I'm in when I pick a new one. I usually use the same ID eveywhere since I've given up trying to be creative.

Anyway, this post seems to have changed directions.....so as you were.

 

[freeandfun1]

I have changed avatars a few times, the're usually a reflection of the mood I'm in when I pick a new one. I usually use the same ID eveywhere since I've given up trying to be creative.

Anyway, this post seems to have changed directions.....so as you were.

I too change avatars often, but my ID is the same in many locations.

 

[Isaac Brock]

Just an observation. I notice that most of the conservative AND moderate board members have ID's that identify them in a neutral manner. Tye have ID's such as Freeandfun1, JarHead, KL, DK, GOPJeff, Merlin, Kathianne, etc.

However, most of our liberal members take ID's that are clearly hateful and clear in their agenda.

For example, our newest member is "BushHater". Now, I wonder what position he takes. Look at the other ID's of our liberal members and you get my point.

On the lib side, in addition to BushHater, we have names like Bullypulpit, smirknjesus, nakedemperor, etc.

Notice how you can immediately see the hate (and just think, libs love to say they are the loving, inclusive group) just in their ID's alone. To me, it makes a VERY sad statement about their mental stability.

Hahaha you missed me! Though mine's more tongue-in-cheek!

 

[OCA]

well it's only your opinion that gay marriage would be a problem, and the polls (other peoples OPINIONS are consistent with yours for the most part), but it hasn't happened yet so we can't know for sure.

I agree, people should take marriage seriously, so why is it that the divorce rate in this country is through the roof, seems to me people aren't taking it seriously already.

So are you saying that the only reason gays want to marry is so they can "add financial gain to their vile perversions"? Couldn't they possibly, just possibly be getting married because, oh, I don't know, because they love each other. Should they not be allowed to show their love too?

Tell me, are you in favor of calling it a civil union, but not marriage? Can they still get the same benifits heterosexual couples get when they marry?

Two people of the same gender cannot love each other in the fashion that marriage denotes, its impossible, what they mistake for love is usually the usual homosexual trait of unquenchable and promiscuous lust.

Homosexuals have the highest levels of promiscuity, domestic violence and AIDS or other sexually transmitted diseases, the factual and statistical proof was long ago posted on this board, look it up.

One cannot believe the bible to be the whole truth and still condone any form of or capitulation to homosexuality other than to pray for god to heal their troubled soul.

 

[jimnyc]

well it's only your opinion that gay marriage would be a problem, and the polls (other peoples OPINIONS are consistent with yours for the most part), but it hasn't happened yet so we can't know for sure.

Gays are already the source of various problems (aids, molestation, dysfunctional families...). I don't see a need to perpetuate the problem.

I agree, people should take marriage seriously, so why is it that the divorce rate in this country is through the roof, seems to me people aren't taking it seriously already.

I agree that there are already issues and that way too many don't take it seriously. Unfortunately, that does absolutely nothing to lend a hand in the argument for gay marriages being acceptable. Apples and oranges.

So are you saying that the only reason gays want to marry is so they can "add financial gain to their vile perversions"? Couldn't they possibly, just possibly be getting married because, oh, I don't know, because they love each other. Should they not be allowed to show their love too?

I never said it was the only reason but it's certainly been one of the top arguments by those supportive of the movement. They are demanding equal rights (which they already have) and want the benefits that come along with a marriage. If it was based purely on love then they would find civil unions acceptable.

Tell me, are you in favor of calling it a civil union, but not marriage? Can they still get the same benifits heterosexual couples get when they marry?

I'm in favor of neither, but I would rather it be civil unions as opposed to marriage.

 

[Said1]

Hahaha you missed me! Though mine's more tongue-in-cheek!

That and IsaaC is spelled with a C.

I too change avatars often, but my ID is the same in many locations.

An ID that would certainly be recognizable to say the least.

 

[Isaac Brock]

That and IsaaC is spelled with a C.

[Qutoe]I too change avatars often, but my ID is the same in many locations.

An ID that would certainly one that would recognizable to say the least. [/QUOTE]

True!
Though I won't slag someone for mistyping an avatar. I can deal. :tng:

 

[ChristianLibral]

Two people of the same gender cannot love each other in the fashion that marriage denotes, its impossible, what they mistake for love is usually the usual homosexual trait of unquenchable and promiscuous lust.
QUOTE]

where's the proof for that?

"Gays are already the source of various problems (aids, molestation, dysfunctional families...). I don't see a need to perpetuate the problem."

Was a gay couple the source of the aids virus? Are gays the cause of molestation? dysfunctional families? i don't know where you got this stuff, do you have a source?

 

[Said1]

An ID that would certainly one that would recognizable to say the least.

True!
Though I won't slag someone for mistyping an avatar. I can deal. :tng:

I spelled quote wrong grrrrr - thank god for the "edit" option. I finally figured out how to do it myself, then I spell quote wrong!

Seriously IsaaC, if you look back at old posts (and a thread), how many different ways have I spelled it? At a minimum 3 Issac, Isac, Isaak. :alco:

 

[jimnyc]

Was a gay couple the source of the aids virus?

Nope, but they are clearly the leader in spreading the disease. Do you really need data to backup that claim?

Are gays the cause of molestation?

Nope, but again, who's the leader of the pack?

Homosexuals Molest Children At A Far Higher Rate Than Heterosexuals

Homosexuals account for only 1-2% of our population based on current surveys. The National Opinion Research Center in 1992 found that 2.8% of men and 1.4% of women identified themselves as “homosexual” or “bisexual. A 1995 survey of 18-49-year-old men published by the Journal of Sex Research indicated that 2.6% of them had engaged in homosexual sex within the prior 12 months; 4% had had homosexual sex within the past five years. In other words, at least 98-99% of our population is heterosexual in orientation.

Homosexual activists routinely claim that most child molesters are “heterosexual” males, thus shifting the focus away from their own very high rates of molestation. Since 98-99% of the population is heterosexual, it is technically correct to say that most molestations are done by heterosexuals. However, statistics indicate that homosexuals pose a far more serious threat to children than do heterosexuals.

For example: In 1987, Dr. Stephen Rubin of Whitman College conducted a ten-state study of sex abuse cases involving school teachers. He studied 199 cases. Of those, 122 male teachers had molested girls, while 14 female teachers had molested boys. He also discovered that 59 homosexual male teachers had molested boys and four female homosexual teachers had molested girls. In other words, 32 percent of those child molestation cases involved homosexuals. Nearly a third of these cases come from only 1-2% of the population.

dysfunctional families?

What I meant here is that homosexuality is a strong reason for family dysfunctions. Families that are forced to deal with these issues have an alarming rate of dysfunctionality. Sure, you can make an argument that they should be more accepting, I think they should help the sick person seek medical care.

 

[freeandfun1]

What I meant here is that homosexuality is a strong reason for family dysfunctions. Families that are forced to deal with these issues have an alarming rate of dysfunctionality. Sure, you can make an argument that they should be more accepting, I think they should help the sick person seek medical care.

What just happened today with McGreevy is a good example. Perhaps his wife knew he was gay and was just along for the "ride", but now think of the shit his kids are going to have to go through.

 

[Said1]

What I meant here is that homosexuality is a strong reason for family dysfunctions. Families that are forced to deal with these issues have an alarming rate of dysfunctionality. Sure, you can make an argument that they should be more accepting, I think they should help the sick person seek medical care.

I think allowing homosexual couples to adopt children is not in a childs best interest. Having same sex parents is a big burden for a child to take on and deal with as it grows up. Sure, as Jimnyc stated, you can argue that people should be more accepting, but a child should not have to fight your battles in the school yard either JMHO.

 

[jimnyc]

What just happened today with McGreevy is a good example. Perhaps his wife knew he was gay and was just along for the "ride", but now think of the shit his kids are going to have to go through.

Yep, and McGreevey is in serious need of psychiatric assistance! He doesn't know if he wants to be faithful or cheat, heterosexual or homosexual!

 

[freeandfun1]

Yep, and McGreevey is in serious need of psychiatric assistance! He doesn't know if he wants to be faithful or cheat, heterosexual or homosexual!

His lust for power has really got him in a "pickle".

 

[ChristianLibral]

Nope, but they are clearly the leader in spreading the disease. Do you really need data to backup that claim?



Nope, but again, who's the leader of the pack?

Homosexuals Molest Children At A Far Higher Rate Than Heterosexuals

Homosexuals account for only 1-2% of our population based on current surveys. The National Opinion Research Center in 1992 found that 2.8% of men and 1.4% of women identified themselves as “homosexual” or “bisexual. A 1995 survey of 18-49-year-old men published by the Journal of Sex Research indicated that 2.6% of them had engaged in homosexual sex within the prior 12 months; 4% had had homosexual sex within the past five years. In other words, at least 98-99% of our population is heterosexual in orientation.

Homosexual activists routinely claim that most child molesters are “heterosexual” males, thus shifting the focus away from their own very high rates of molestation. Since 98-99% of the population is heterosexual, it is technically correct to say that most molestations are done by heterosexuals. However, statistics indicate that homosexuals pose a far more serious threat to children than do heterosexuals.

For example: In 1987, Dr. Stephen Rubin of Whitman College conducted a ten-state study of sex abuse cases involving school teachers. He studied 199 cases. Of those, 122 male teachers had molested girls, while 14 female teachers had molested boys. He also discovered that 59 homosexual male teachers had molested boys and four female homosexual teachers had molested girls. In other words, 32 percent of those child molestation cases involved homosexuals. Nearly a third of these cases come from only 1-2% of the population.



What I meant here is that homosexuality is a strong reason for family dysfunctions. Families that are forced to deal with these issues have an alarming rate of dysfunctionality. Sure, you can make an argument that they should be more accepting, I think they should help the sick person seek medical care.

You said gays were the "source" of all these things, thanks for clarifying what you meant to say.

 

[Said1]

What just happened today with McGreevy is a good example. Perhaps his wife knew he was gay and was just along for the "ride", but now think of the shit his kids are going to have to go through.

Grrr - I didn't see your post due to edit needed (as per my usual) in mine.