Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The oldest women to ever give birth is either 70 or 74, depending on the report you want to believe. At what age was the oldest homosexual to give birth from a same sex coupling
(Laughter)
It is irrelevant Pop, why don't you understand that? Procreation has NEVER been required for civil marriage and it's never going to be. You can't constitutionally discriminate against people who don't have children, can't have children or don't fucking want them.
With or without children, why don't gay families get to enjoy the same protections you do?
In my opinion they do. What's your problem?
I'm amused that he thinks gays will lose despite it being the homophobes who keep losing at every turn
If that's the case, maybe it's because our religious liberties are being eroded by a Liberal agenda and a Liberal media that empowers such movements while castigating those with traditional values and labeling them "homophobic".
It is irrelevant Pop, why don't you understand that? Procreation has NEVER been required for civil marriage and it's never going to be. You can't constitutionally discriminate against people who don't have children, can't have children or don't fucking want them.
With or without children, why don't gay families get to enjoy the same protections you do?
In my opinion they do. What's your problem?
Your opinion and five bucks will get you a coffee at Starbucks...but little else. We're legally marrying, we'll continue to legally marry with or without children. Why? Because procreation has nothing to do with civil marriage.
Minds that hold such vile thoughts are too small to be of any consequence.In my opinion they do. What's your problem?
Your opinion and five bucks will get you a coffee at Starbucks...but little else. We're legally marrying, we'll continue to legally marry with or without children. Why? Because procreation has nothing to do with civil marriage.
It's a shallow, empty pitiful marriage of perversion that contributes nothing to the furtherment of humanity , a travesty of history, a sham , a disgrace. But unfortunately it's something you sexual degenerates have every right to engage in - Gay Marriage. Piss on your heterosexual ancestors, and society in general - you're still a pervert, always will be a pervert and regardless of how people feign acceptance of you - behind your back and in their minds you're always be A Faggot, A Dyke, A Queer and a degenerate.
In my opinion they do. What's your problem?
Your opinion and five bucks will get you a coffee at Starbucks...but little else. We're legally marrying, we'll continue to legally marry with or without children. Why? Because procreation has nothing to do with civil marriage.
It's a shallow, empty pitiful marriage of perversion that contributes nothing to the furtherment of humanity , a travesty of history, a sham , a disgrace. But unfortunately it's something you sexual degenerates have every right to engage in - Gay Marriage. Piss on your heterosexual ancestors, and society in general - you're still a pervert, always will be a pervert and regardless of how people feign acceptance of you - behind your back and in their minds you're always be A Faggot, A Dyke, A Queer and a degenerate.
Minds that hold such vile thoughts are too small to be of any consequence.Your opinion and five bucks will get you a coffee at Starbucks...but little else. We're legally marrying, we'll continue to legally marry with or without children. Why? Because procreation has nothing to do with civil marriage.
It's a shallow, empty pitiful marriage of perversion that contributes nothing to the furtherment of humanity , a travesty of history, a sham , a disgrace. But unfortunately it's something you sexual degenerates have every right to engage in - Gay Marriage. Piss on your heterosexual ancestors, and society in general - you're still a pervert, always will be a pervert and regardless of how people feign acceptance of you - behind your back and in their minds you're always be A Faggot, A Dyke, A Queer and a degenerate.
Even the feeble minded should be allowed their rights, in spite of how they would deny rights to others.Minds that hold such vile thoughts are too small to be of any consequence.It's a shallow, empty pitiful marriage of perversion that contributes nothing to the furtherment of humanity , a travesty of history, a sham , a disgrace. But unfortunately it's something you sexual degenerates have every right to engage in - Gay Marriage. Piss on your heterosexual ancestors, and society in general - you're still a pervert, always will be a pervert and regardless of how people feign acceptance of you - behind your back and in their minds you're always be A Faggot, A Dyke, A Queer and a degenerate.
Indeed....isn't it odd how they are allowed to legally marry with such tiny minds?
Even the feeble minded should be allowed their rights, in spite of how they would deny rights to others.Minds that hold such vile thoughts are too small to be of any consequence.
Indeed....isn't it odd how they are allowed to legally marry with such tiny minds?
Then why is it that one of the reasons we hear bandied about, as to why gays want to and should get to marry, is to get in on the same tax breaks that married people get which single people do not?It is irrelevant Pop, why don't you understand that? Procreation has NEVER been required for civil marriage and it's never going to be. You can't constitutionally discriminate against people who don't have children, can't have children or don't fucking want them.
With or without children, why don't gay families get to enjoy the same protections you do?
It is irrelevant Pop, why don't you understand that? Procreation has NEVER been required for civil marriage and it's never going to be. You can't constitutionally discriminate against people who don't have children, can't have children or don't fucking want them.
With or without children, why don't gay families get to enjoy the same protections you do?
In my opinion they do. What's your problem?
Your opinion and five bucks will get you a coffee at Starbucks...but little else. We're legally marrying, we'll continue to legally marry with or without children. Why? Because procreation has nothing to do with civil marriage.
Then why is it that one of the reasons we hear bandied about, as to why gays want to and should get to marry, is to get in on the same tax breaks that married people get which single people do not?It is irrelevant Pop, why don't you understand that? Procreation has NEVER been required for civil marriage and it's never going to be. You can't constitutionally discriminate against people who don't have children, can't have children or don't fucking want them.
With or without children, why don't gay families get to enjoy the same protections you do?
Why is it you are not as concerned about the rights of singles, as you are about getting your grubs on all the bennies?
In my opinion they do. What's your problem?
Your opinion and five bucks will get you a coffee at Starbucks...but little else. We're legally marrying, we'll continue to legally marry with or without children. Why? Because procreation has nothing to do with civil marriage.
Five bucks for a cup of coffee at Starbucks? Glad I don't live where you do! Damn
You argue that the law doesn't specifically state that marriage is between a male and a female, but any two adults are allowed.
Any reason the laws don't specify Martians? And why it is specific to only two?
The reason Martians are not mentioned is probably the same reason that getting your change back from your five at Starbucks isn't considered gambling. Laws normally don't include silly concepts within them. Do you really think that, when marriage was established as law, anyone would ever think people of the same sex would ever want to marry?
Now, let's look at why marriage is between two and only two.
If the law was intended to include same sex, the number two would be nonsense. Two serves no real purpose when those non capable of breeding with each other are included. You do realize that 10000 of the same sex could enter into a marriage contract and never produce a single offspring from within that marriage? You know that right? So if same sex was included it is nonsensical to include any number. The only number reasonable to exclude would be 1.
So it's actually pretty simple to see why ONLY two is allowed to marry. One Male to One Female = 2, which, it's rather funny, but in a manner of speaking, it is the only marriage relationship in which 1 + 1 can actually = 3, 4 or more.
Is that cool or what?
Two is also the best way for society to keep track of bloodlines so we do not breed with those too closely related, and keep order.
No, you want the bennies.Then why is it that one of the reasons we hear bandied about, as to why gays want to and should get to marry, is to get in on the same tax breaks that married people get which single people do not?It is irrelevant Pop, why don't you understand that? Procreation has NEVER been required for civil marriage and it's never going to be. You can't constitutionally discriminate against people who don't have children, can't have children or don't fucking want them.
With or without children, why don't gay families get to enjoy the same protections you do?
Why is it you are not as concerned about the rights of singles, as you are about getting your grubs on all the bennies?
I don't give a shit about the "bennies". Take the "bennies" away...but until you are successful, why isn't my committed relationship as deserving of them as a heterosexual couple?
I only care about equality.
How is it you only get concerned about married couples getting their "grubs on all the bennies" when they are gay couples?Then why is it that one of the reasons we hear bandied about, as to why gays want to and should get to marry, is to get in on the same tax breaks that married people get which single people do not?It is irrelevant Pop, why don't you understand that? Procreation has NEVER been required for civil marriage and it's never going to be. You can't constitutionally discriminate against people who don't have children, can't have children or don't fucking want them.
With or without children, why don't gay families get to enjoy the same protections you do?
Why is it you are not as concerned about the rights of singles, as you are about getting your grubs on all the bennies?
You are wrong.How is it you only get concerned about married couples getting their "grubs on all the bennies" when they are gay couples?Then why is it that one of the reasons we hear bandied about, as to why gays want to and should get to marry, is to get in on the same tax breaks that married people get which single people do not?It is irrelevant Pop, why don't you understand that? Procreation has NEVER been required for civil marriage and it's never going to be. You can't constitutionally discriminate against people who don't have children, can't have children or don't fucking want them.
With or without children, why don't gay families get to enjoy the same protections you do?
Why is it you are not as concerned about the rights of singles, as you are about getting your grubs on all the bennies?
You are wrong.How is it you only get concerned about married couples getting their "grubs on all the bennies" when they are gay couples?Then why is it that one of the reasons we hear bandied about, as to why gays want to and should get to marry, is to get in on the same tax breaks that married people get which single people do not?
Why is it you are not as concerned about the rights of singles, as you are about getting your grubs on all the bennies?
I don't like it that married couples get all sorts of special tax breaks that singles do not.
Unlike you and your progressive bretheren, I find social engineering via the tax code, legislation and regulation wrong in all cases.
Having a principled stance on issues is really easy when you put honest effort into it.
Your opinion and five bucks will get you a coffee at Starbucks...but little else. We're legally marrying, we'll continue to legally marry with or without children. Why? Because procreation has nothing to do with civil marriage.
Five bucks for a cup of coffee at Starbucks? Glad I don't live where you do! Damn
You argue that the law doesn't specifically state that marriage is between a male and a female, but any two adults are allowed.
Any reason the laws don't specify Martians? And why it is specific to only two?
The reason Martians are not mentioned is probably the same reason that getting your change back from your five at Starbucks isn't considered gambling. Laws normally don't include silly concepts within them. Do you really think that, when marriage was established as law, anyone would ever think people of the same sex would ever want to marry?
Now, let's look at why marriage is between two and only two.
If the law was intended to include same sex, the number two would be nonsense. Two serves no real purpose when those non capable of breeding with each other are included. You do realize that 10000 of the same sex could enter into a marriage contract and never produce a single offspring from within that marriage? You know that right? So if same sex was included it is nonsensical to include any number. The only number reasonable to exclude would be 1.
So it's actually pretty simple to see why ONLY two is allowed to marry. One Male to One Female = 2, which, it's rather funny, but in a manner of speaking, it is the only marriage relationship in which 1 + 1 can actually = 3, 4 or more.
Is that cool or what?
Two is also the best way for society to keep track of bloodlines so we do not breed with those too closely related, and keep order.
Repeating your twisted opinions doesn't change the fact that they are a fantasy. Civil marriage is not about procreation.
Even the feeble minded should be allowed their rights, in spite of how they would deny rights to others.Minds that hold such vile thoughts are too small to be of any consequence.
Indeed....isn't it odd how they are allowed to legally marry with such tiny minds?
Even the feeble minded should be allowed their rights, in spite of how they would deny rights to others.Indeed....isn't it odd how they are allowed to legally marry with such tiny minds?
Let the Faggots Marry and the Dykes too - it's their right as Free Americans. It's not their right however to engage in the devious tactics and mental manipulation they have been perpetrating on the young and uninvolved.
So, we have cut to the chase and you can admit that you are really after the bennies. I'll take the small victory.You are wrong.How is it you only get concerned about married couples getting their "grubs on all the bennies" when they are gay couples?
I don't like it that married couples get all sorts of special tax breaks that singles do not.
Unlike you and your progressive bretheren, I find social engineering via the tax code, legislation and regulation wrong in all cases.
Having a principled stance on issues is really easy when you put honest effort into it.
So...what have you ACTIVELY done to end such tax code advantages? And you don't seem to be aware there are other benefits for legally married couples beyond tax advantages.
