Alabama SC orders judges to stop issuing homosexuals "marriage" licenses.

[Syriusly]

So you are just speaking for others, unidentified, unknown......essentially your fantasy.

How do I know you are a parent? How do I know the parents you know are real? You think you speak for all parents, but you don't..

How do I know that you aren't a Russian operative? How do I know that you aren't a 9 year old boy who is stole his mom's computer password? How do I know you aren't a mental patient out on parole?

And my work here is done. This my friends is how a bad argument dies.

Later.

Are the trolling hours done?

 

[James Everett]

And according to the dictionary today it is;

Marriage is our invention. It is whatever we say it is. We say it includes same sex couples. And our assessment is as authoritative in our era as the assessment of those in the past was in theirs.

In 37 of 50 States, marriage includes same sex couples. With that number likely to increase to 50 of 50 in June. Progress is a wonderful thing.

No, words are not that as we may choose to define them to be in order to fit that which we wish.

Actually, that's exactly what words are. They change as their meaning and usage change. That's why we keep printing new editions of dictionaries every year. Because the meaning and usage of words change over time. This is especially true of legal definitions, which change with any statutory adjustment.

You can ignore the dictionary if you wish. You can ignore the courts if you wish. You can ignore the law if you wish. But your willful ignorance doesn't change a thing. Marriage still includes same sex couples. Its still recognized in 37 of 50 States. And its still likely to be recognized in 50 of 50 States by June.

Get used to the idea.

Again, definitions do not change,.

Definitions change all of the time.

Look at the definition of 'Truck'

A truck is a truck. It isn't a car, it isn't a bicycle, it is a truck. It can have 18 wheels or four.

Further in legal terminology, an attorney would be sure to distinguish in a court case the deference between a "Truck" and a "Tractor- trailer as in an 18 wheeler. Did a truck hit you? Or was it a tractor? Did the tractor hit you? or was it the trailer?

 

[Syriusly]

No, words are not that as we may choose to define them to be in order to fit that which we wish.

Actually, that's exactly what words are. They change as their meaning and usage change. That's why we keep printing new editions of dictionaries every year. Because the meaning and usage of words change over time. This is especially true of legal definitions, which change with any statutory adjustment.

You can ignore the dictionary if you wish. You can ignore the courts if you wish. You can ignore the law if you wish. But your willful ignorance doesn't change a thing. Marriage still includes same sex couples. Its still recognized in 37 of 50 States. And its still likely to be recognized in 50 of 50 States by June.

Get used to the idea.

Again, definitions do not change,.

Definitions change all of the time.

Look at the definition of 'Truck'

A truck is a truck. It isn't a car, it isn't a bicycle, it is a truck. It can have 18 wheels or four.

Further in legal terminology, an attorney would be sure to distinguish in a court case the deference between a "Truck" and a "Tractor- trailer as in an 18 wheeler. Did a truck hit you? Or was it a tractor? Did the tractor hit you? or was it the trailer?

How can that be- 'definitions do not change'......lol......

In England- where they speak English.....a truck is a lorry.....not a truck.

 

[elektra]

So you are saying that because a child is growing up with homosexual parents that they are living a homosexual lifestyle? What twisted world do you live in? I suppose you have sex with your children in a heterosexual lifestyle? Living with gay people is not forcing the children to live as gays! Children don't care all they know is they have loving parents period! You also said that the neighbor kids would tell them and they would feel different? Umm so you support bullying of children because they may have gay parents? You blame the parents but not the bullies! Wow


I see more hate from heterosexuals then homosexuals. And most kids live in with heterosexual parents! So your kids learn to bully and hate! What a great parent you are! Loser

Yes, I am stating that homosexuals live a homosexual lifestyle.

Hard to wrap your twisted mind around that, huh. moron. You see more hate? Right, you make things up. Idiot.

 

[Syriusly]

What orphans in orphanages?

We are talking about adoption- and the vast majority of children available for adoption are children abandoned by their biological parents.

I have shown you the stats before and you clearly just don't give a damn about the children who spend years waiting to be adopted after their biological parents abandoned them

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

Every child adopted- by either a heterosexual or homosexual- is a child that now has a family.

You don't want those children to have a family.

Don't you have a whole household of children you are currently ignoring, is it you who claims to have like 5 kids your raising. I would think they need your attention more than I.

I am an amazingly lucky man who happens to be married to a wonderful wife and whose fantastic daughter is busy cooking dinner for us right now.

Back to why you prefer to have 30,000 children spend 3 or more years in foster care rather than allow them to be adopted

I have shown you the stats before and you clearly just don't give a damn about the children who spend years waiting to be adopted after their biological parents abandoned them

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

Every child adopted- by either a heterosexual or homosexual- is a child that now has a family.

You don't want those children to have a family.

So sorry, I confused you with another.

Forcing children into Homosexual's lifestyle is abuse. Pure and simple. That you are to ignorant to understand that, continues the abuse of children with who have no choice.

So you are saying that because a child is growing up with homosexual parents that they are living a homosexual lifestyle? What twisted world do you live in? I suppose you have sex with your children in a heterosexual lifestyle? Living with gay people is not forcing the children to live as gays! Children don't care all they know is they have loving parents period! You also said that the neighbor kids would tell them and they would feel different? Umm so you support bullying of children because they may have gay parents? You blame the parents but not the bullies! Wow


I see more hate from heterosexuals then homosexuals. And most kids live in with heterosexual parents! So your kids learn to bully and hate! What a great parent you are! Loser

Yes, I am stating that homosexuals live a homosexual lifestyle.

Hard to wrap your twisted mind around that, huh. moron.

No- your prejudice and bigotry comes through loud and clear.

 

[elektra]

I am advocating that children be adopted by loving parents- some single parents, some married.

And what kind of sex those parents may- or may not- be having is none of those children's business.

Why the hell do you think it is the business of any children- adopted or otherwise to know how their parents are- or are not having sex?

Now you are not only a hypocrite but extremely naive.

You do not think that children learn or are able to understand what is happening in their "homes"?

You do not think that as soon as the neighbor kids or the school kids learn that Tommy had two Dads that they will not at the least teach the kids what are happening.

And you make the claim I do not know children. Are you naive, ignorant, or simply a sick advocate.

You haven't a clue about children- you demonstrate your ignorance and your bigotry in every post.

I say once again

And what kind of sex those parents may- or may not- be having is none of those children's business.

Why the hell do you think it is the business of any children- adopted or otherwise to know how their parents are- or are not having sex?

Your sick fantasies about homosexual parents are nothing but that- your sick fantasies.

Elektra claims to speak for all children. She's literally insisted she speaks for all children.

That kind of delusion precludes a rational argument.

Projecting again.

 

[elektra]

No- your prejudice and bigotry comes through loud and clear.

Whats wrong, you have to speak for everybody, huh.

 

[elektra]

It is clear you have no idea about parenting and have never raised any children.

I don't force any sexuality on my child- I teach my child to judge people based upon how they treat others and how they treat themselves- and not to judge people based upon their skin color, or their religion, or their sexual preference.

My kid is turning out fine- and stay the hell away from our family you pervert.

You stated your children are repulsed by kissing. I must question your parenting if your children are repulsed by what you taught them, as you stated here in this thread.

Don't bring your family into the conversation if you get offended so easily.

I don't have a problem discussing my family- we are doing great.

I pointed out that you clearly have never been around any children- and apparently don't even know any children.

You said that children would be repulsed by the mechanics of homosexual sex- and I pointed out- like every parent knows- and person who has been around children for those moments- is that children are repulsed by the mechanics of any sex, and most even find french kissing repulsive.

And they find the idea of their parents having sex really, really repulsive.

All kids are repulsed but your own? How is it running backwards.

 

[Syriusly]

No- your prejudice and bigotry comes through loud and clear.

Whats wrong, you have to speak for everybody, huh.

You thinking someone is horning in on your act?

Guess again.

I am providing my opinion- your prejudice and bigotry comes through loud and clear.

 

[Syriusly]

It is clear you have no idea about parenting and have never raised any children.

I don't force any sexuality on my child- I teach my child to judge people based upon how they treat others and how they treat themselves- and not to judge people based upon their skin color, or their religion, or their sexual preference.

My kid is turning out fine- and stay the hell away from our family you pervert.

You stated your children are repulsed by kissing. I must question your parenting if your children are repulsed by what you taught them, as you stated here in this thread.

Don't bring your family into the conversation if you get offended so easily.

I don't have a problem discussing my family- we are doing great.

I pointed out that you clearly have never been around any children- and apparently don't even know any children.

You said that children would be repulsed by the mechanics of homosexual sex- and I pointed out- like every parent knows- and person who has been around children for those moments- is that children are repulsed by the mechanics of any sex, and most even find french kissing repulsive.

And they find the idea of their parents having sex really, really repulsive.

All kids are repulsed but your own? How is it running backwards.

Your complete lack of experience around children is just your loss.

Meanwhile

I don't have a problem discussing my family- we are doing great.

I pointed out that you clearly have never been around any children- and apparently don't even know any children.

You said that children would be repulsed by the mechanics of homosexual sex- and I pointed out- like every parent knows- and person who has been around children for those moments- is that children are repulsed by the mechanics of any sex, and most even find french kissing repulsive.

And they find the idea of their parents having sex really, really repulsive.

 

[AntiParty]

I think all Alabamans should count as 3/5 of a person.

"I think all Alabamans should count" ~ I think you posted more after this but I fell laughing due to irony.

 

[James Everett]

No, words are not that as we may choose to define them to be in order to fit that which we wish.

Actually, that's exactly what words are. They change as their meaning and usage change. That's why we keep printing new editions of dictionaries every year. Because the meaning and usage of words change over time. This is especially true of legal definitions, which change with any statutory adjustment.

You can ignore the dictionary if you wish. You can ignore the courts if you wish. You can ignore the law if you wish. But your willful ignorance doesn't change a thing. Marriage still includes same sex couples. Its still recognized in 37 of 50 States. And its still likely to be recognized in 50 of 50 States by June.

Get used to the idea.

Again, definitions do not change,.

Definitions change all of the time.

Look at the definition of 'Truck'

A truck is a truck. It isn't a car, it isn't a bicycle, it is a truck. It can have 18 wheels or four.

And what did 'truck' mean before there were motorized vehicles?

Does the term 'hand truck' ring any bells?

You know the 'definitions never change' schtick is an idiot's gambit. You're being contrary out of petulance now.

You have modified the definition of truck with the word "hand" which makes it a different tool. A hand truck is a different tool than a pickup truck, or a tractor. "Truck" as a stand alone word means to "traffic for exchange". The definition remains the same, simply because the word "Truck" is used to describe various tools, does not mean the proper definition changed, it simply means that people are ignorant, and thus not using the proper modified verbiage to mean what they are actually speaking of in their verbiage. The definition remains set. Now in terms of "Gay marriage" you are modifying the word to mean something other than simple marriage, which is " a contract between a man and a woman". Even with your modifier of "Gay" you are using incorrect verbiage. The proper modifier is "Sodomite" marriage, which separates it from the proper definition of marriage, just as "hand truck" modifies "truck". Again, the proper terminology would be a civil union between sodomites. Please explain why it is necessary to create a fiction rather than simply use proper terminology such as a "civil union?

 

[AntiParty]

Actually, that's exactly what words are. They change as their meaning and usage change. That's why we keep printing new editions of dictionaries every year. Because the meaning and usage of words change over time. This is especially true of legal definitions, which change with any statutory adjustment.

You can ignore the dictionary if you wish. You can ignore the courts if you wish. You can ignore the law if you wish. But your willful ignorance doesn't change a thing. Marriage still includes same sex couples. Its still recognized in 37 of 50 States. And its still likely to be recognized in 50 of 50 States by June.

Get used to the idea.

Again, definitions do not change,.

Definitions change all of the time.

Look at the definition of 'Truck'

A truck is a truck. It isn't a car, it isn't a bicycle, it is a truck. It can have 18 wheels or four.

And what did 'truck' mean before there were motorized vehicles?

Does the term 'hand truck' ring any bells?

You know the 'definitions never change' schtick is an idiot's gambit. You're being contrary out of petulance now.

You have modified the definition of truck with the word "hand" which makes it a different tool. A hand truck is a different tool than a pickup truck, or a tractor. "Truck" as a stand alone word means to "traffic for exchange". The definition remains the same, simply because the word "Truck" is used to describe various tools, does not mean the proper definition changed, it simply means that people are ignorant, and thus not using the proper modified verbiage to mean what they are actually speaking of in their verbiage. The definition remains set. Now in terms of "Gay marriage" you are modifying the word to mean something other than simple marriage, which is " a contract between a man and a woman". Even with your modifier of "Gay" you are using incorrect verbiage. The proper modifier is "Sodomite" marriage, which separates it from the proper definition of marriage, just as "hand truck" modifies "truck". Again, the proper terminology would be a civil union between sodomites. Please explain why it is necessary to create a fiction rather than simply use proper terminology such as a "civil union?

Child.

If we approached law in your terms; "Sodomite Marriage" would you agree with the Freedom or would you want to control Butt Sex with forceful Law? You should note that many Man/Woman marriages have butt sex. Even some girlfriend/boyfriend.

You seem to be spewing law about "sodomy" and you are correct, decades ago there were laws written to CONTROL the gay population. I'm sure you aren't one of those CONTROL freaks, (R)ight?

 

[elektra]

I am a person who is angry with Elektra's bigotry.

Reasonable people disagree with me all the time and I don't get angry about it.

Elektra's absolute ignorance- and determined effort to stay ignorant annoys me.

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

Elektra doesn't give a damn about any of the 33,000 kids who wait 3 or more years to be adopted- if she had her way, no child would be adopted by a homosexual- so that number would just go up- every child who would have been adopted by a homosexual would make that number 33,001- and then 33,002.

The math is simple.

We have more kids abandoned by their parents than there are heterosexuals willing to adopt them. Telling those kids its better for them to linger in foster care, or age out of the system than be adopted by a homosexual who is offering them a lifetime commitment pisses me off.

And I am okay with that.

Poor idiot, you speak for all the poor children but I can't? That is not bigotry?

What makes you think, children want to be adopted by homosexuals?

I display no bigotry, I merely stated children do not want you to force them to live with homosexuals, the only response you have to that, beings how you can not speak for the children, is to hate me, call me names, call me a bigot.

When I state they will learn what homosexuality is, you state they will not and I do not know children, which I replied, that you are naive and ignorant if you think children are not smart enough to figure out what Dad and Dad or Mom and Mom are doing behind closed doors.

You are simply pissed off because you are confronted with your own bigotry and ignorance and do not have an answer, you can only reply with hate, or try to rephrase your statements as if you had not said what you did.

When I ask if you taught your children about man to man anal sex, you imply that I am perverted and should not be around children, yet you would put children that orphaned in a homosexual lifestyle where they would learn what man to man anal sex is.

Its okay for other children to learn this but damned be the person who suggest that you teach your child what you would have other children learn.

I stated its Wrong to force a Child into a homosexual lifestyle, I asked you if you taught your children the intimate details of homosexuality, as you would have others learn, and I am the bigot? I am the one who hates? I am the pervert?

You will not teach your children about homosexuality but you would force other children to learn about homosexuality by living in a homosexual lifestyle.

Me, I would never advocate forcing any children to live the homosexual lifestyle.

 

[AntiParty]

You are sick **** because you despise homosexuals.

You are an angry person who is angry. You are angry because there are people who disagree with you.

I am a person who is angry with Elektra's bigotry.

Reasonable people disagree with me all the time and I don't get angry about it.

Elektra's absolute ignorance- and determined effort to stay ignorant annoys me.

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

Elektra doesn't give a damn about any of the 33,000 kids who wait 3 or more years to be adopted- if she had her way, no child would be adopted by a homosexual- so that number would just go up- every child who would have been adopted by a homosexual would make that number 33,001- and then 33,002.

The math is simple.

We have more kids abandoned by their parents than there are heterosexuals willing to adopt them. Telling those kids its better for them to linger in foster care, or age out of the system than be adopted by a homosexual who is offering them a lifetime commitment pisses me off.

And I am okay with that.

Poor idiot, you speak for all the poor children but I can't? That is not bigotry?

What makes you think, children want to be adopted by homosexuals?

I display no bigotry, I merely stated children do not want you to force them to live with homosexuals, the only response you have to that, beings how you can not speak for the children, is to hate me, call me names, call me a bigot.

When I state they will learn what homosexuality is, you state they will not and I do not know children, which I replied, that you are naive and ignorant if you think children are not smart enough to figure out what Dad and Dad or Mom and Mom are doing behind closed doors.

You are simply pissed off because you are confronted with your own bigotry and ignorance and do not have an answer, you can only reply with hate, or try to rephrase your statements as if you had not said what you did.

When I ask if you taught your children about man to man anal sex, you imply that I am perverted and should not be around children, yet you would put children that orphaned in a homosexual lifestyle where they would learn what man to man anal sex is.

Its okay for other children to learn this but damned be the person who suggest that you teach your child what you would have other children learn.

I stated its Wrong to force a Child into a homosexual lifestyle, I asked you if you taught your children the intimate details of homosexuality, as you would have others learn, and I am the bigot? I am the one who hates? I am the pervert?

You will not teach your children about homosexuality but you would force other children to learn about homosexuality by living in a homosexual lifestyle.

Me, I would never advocate forcing any children to live the homosexual lifestyle.

 

[elektra]

I am advocating that children be adopted by loving parents- some single parents, some married.

And what kind of sex those parents may- or may not- be having is none of those children's business.

Why the hell do you think it is the business of any children- adopted or otherwise to know how their parents are- or are not having sex?

Now you are not only a hypocrite but extremely naive.

You do not think that children learn or are able to understand what is happening in their "homes"?

You do not think that as soon as the neighbor kids or the school kids learn that Tommy had two Dads that they will not at the least teach the kids what are happening.

And you make the claim I do not know children. Are you naive, ignorant, or simply a sick advocate.

No reply?

 

[James Everett]

A truck does NOT have 18 wheels, this is why people today are so ignorant.

Excuse me? It is 53 feet long and can haul 80,000 pounds, a tractor trailer, or a truck. My dad was a trucker for 8 years. I went on 2 hauls with him to California and back. I know what I'm talking about.

Excuse me? I have been a "trucker" for 38 years, and I know the difference between a tractor and trailer, and a "Truck". A "truck" is NOT a tractor and trailor. A tractor pulls a trailer, the trailer to which you refer is 53', the combination of the two exceeds 53'.
Now you didnt answer my question concerning "civil union".
Also in a so called "gay marriage" between two of the same sex, which is the husband, and which is the wife, as you see now you must establish a new fiction wherein a woman may be a husband and a man may be a wife. Now a husband and wife may no longer refer to the sex of the individual. Fiction, fiction, fiction.
Please answer at least this one question....
Why is it so important to create a fiction, rather than contract a "civil union" between sodomites,wherein there is neither husband or wife?

 

[Geaux4it]

Keep up the good fight Bama

-Geaux
-------------------

Yep- Alabama- which didn't legalize mixed race marriages until 2000- 23 years after the Supreme Court said that State laws against mixed race marriages were unconstitutional.

Alabama- always fighting the good fight.

FAIL

No comparison

-Geaux

Who is comparing anything?

I am just stating the facts:

Yep- Alabama- which didn't legalize mixed race marriages until 2000- 23 years after the Supreme Court said that State laws against mixed race marriages were unconstitutional.

Alabama- always fighting the good fight

In this case, indeed they are

-Geaux

 

[JakeStarkey]

The reproductive reasoning for prohibition has been rebuked many times in the courts, and SCOTUS will not consider such arguments.

The application of law does change. The social logic has to change before the legal logic in some cases. Examples included the enfranchisement of women and older teenagers and Native Americans; abolition of slavery is another; others include Civil Rights and the coming nationalization of Marriage Equality.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Again, definitions do not change,.

Definitions change all of the time.

Look at the definition of 'Truck'

A truck is a truck. It isn't a car, it isn't a bicycle, it is a truck. It can have 18 wheels or four.

And what did 'truck' mean before there were motorized vehicles?

Does the term 'hand truck' ring any bells?

You know the 'definitions never change' schtick is an idiot's gambit. You're being contrary out of petulance now.

You have modified the definition of truck with the word "hand" which makes it a different tool. A hand truck is a different tool than a pickup truck, or a tractor. "Truck" as a stand alone word means to "traffic for exchange". The definition remains the same, simply because the word "Truck" is used to describe various tools, does not mean the proper definition changed, it simply means that people are ignorant, and thus not using the proper modified verbiage to mean what they are actually speaking of in their verbiage. The definition remains set. Now in terms of "Gay marriage" you are modifying the word to mean something other than simple marriage, which is " a contract between a man and a woman". Even with your modifier of "Gay" you are using incorrect verbiage. The proper modifier is "Sodomite" marriage, which separates it from the proper definition of marriage, just as "hand truck" modifies "truck". Again, the proper terminology would be a civil union between sodomites. Please explain why it is necessary to create a fiction rather than simply use proper terminology such as a "civil union?

Child.

If we approached law in your terms; "Sodomite Marriage" would you agree with the Freedom or would you want to control Butt Sex with forceful Law? You should note that many Man/Woman marriages have butt sex. Even some girlfriend/boyfriend.

You seem to be spewing law about "sodomy" and you are correct, decades ago there were laws written to CONTROL the gay population. I'm sure you aren't one of those CONTROL freaks, (R)ight?

Decades ago? The Sodomy laws were still in effect until just a few years ago.

Now you seem to be implying that since the lowering of the cultural standard, wherein Men engaging in sex with men was deemed unlawful, has the problem with the mental disorder common to men engaging in sex with men, has it since become MORE or less a burden on the culture?