How To Defeat Trumpsters' Worship....Ask Him About His Spine on Gay Marriage..

[PaintMyHouse]

Sil, see if you can honestly answer this question. For the benefit of the child you can have one parent same sex, or one parent opposite sex, or two parents you don't get to pick the sex. Which one, for the child, is best?

None of it has to do with the marriage contract terms, shared with Infants up until 2015 when the Court decided children didn't need representation at the revision Hearing. A marriage contract was invented over a thousand years ago to provide BOTH a mother and a father to children.

They didn't have representation at Obergefell, two of the Justices were performing gay marriages as the question was pending before their Court. The case was a mistrial. It has to be reheard with the proper representation.

Wolves have "lovingly and successfully" raised human children. That doesn't mean we sanction "wolf marriage" where they can adopt human kids. Both mother and father are vital components of a child's life, now missing thanks to last year's High Kangaroo Court's Hearing. That will be remedied. Ask Trump about that remedy on public record..

So you couldn't answer the question and still cannot understand that marriage is not about, and never has been about, and never will be about, children. They are a byproduct of married sex, at best.

This: "None of it has to do with the marriage contract terms, shared with Infants up until 2015..." does not exist.

 

[Silhouette]

Paint, can I include your "children are a byproduct of married sex, at best" line in the TV ad below? See if we can get Trump to echo your words on record? That's bound to be a hit with his evangelical voters!..lol..

Feel free to ask Trump any questions you want.

Just be aware- Trump usually has people ejected from the audience if he doesn't like the question- and by acceptable question he means one that is admiring of Trump and that he is prepared to answer.

Then run the TV commercial about Trump calling the gay marriages he attended "beautiful". Show a shot of Kim Davis behind bars...pan to a child psychologist discussing the woes of children growing up without either a father or mother...as a new matter of contract-revision...pan to a legal expert on Infants and contract law...fade out with candidate's name "this message paid for by the (will win the election) campaign." And Trump can kiss his evangelical support goodbye...

No controlled audiences necessary...

 

[Syriusly]

You have got to let this go at some point. It's invalid to keep harping on this. The war is over, the dead have been buried, you are a hand reaching out from the grave and no one will pull you up. You lost J, you are going to have to, for your own mental health, let this go. Even if you're right, and you aren't, this is not a society that does the best thing for children and it never has and it never will. Let it go, not for me or anyone else, but for yourself. Life will go on and you are truly concerned about the welfare of children there is plenty of bad parenting out there to work on. The children of 2% of the population will manage, alternate lifestyle of mommy and daddy regardless.

Sorry, as long as children are stripped of their contractual rights to both a mother and father in marriage.

If children have 'their contractual rights to both a mother and father in marriage' then why

• Are married parents allowed to divorce- rather than being prevented from divorcing- remember- in no fault states- which is most- the parents need not demonstrate any 'fault' and have no obligation to stay married because they have children.
• Why are parents of children allowed to not marry?
• Why is a single mom- or a single dad- not required to marry someone of the opposite gender because of their children's 'contractual rights'

Why indeed.

The majority of children who are being raised without either a mother or a father are children being raised by single parents- single parents you insult every time you tell everyone that those children are DOOMED.....DOOMED.....

Except of course you don't say that about children being raised by 1 mom- only about children being raised by two mom's.....because this is never about protecting children- this is about your campaign of hate against homosexuals- and by association- their children.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Paint, can I include your "children are a byproduct of married sex, at best" line in the TV ad below? See if we can get Trump to echo your words on record? That's bound to be a hit with his evangelical voters!..lol..

Yep, since I want Trump to lose and it's entirely true.

 

[Silhouette]

Paint, can I include your "children are a byproduct of married sex, at best" line in the TV ad below? See if we can get Trump to echo your words on record? That's bound to be a hit with his evangelical voters!..lol..

Yep, since I want Trump to lose and it's entirely true.

So, you just admitted your position on children's rights is so shitty that it would cause the groundswell behind Trump to disappear if he shared it with you!

Thanks for admitting you're anti-child and think of them like chattel....and that that view is an extreme minority view...one that will lose the election for whoever waives it around in support of "beautiful" "gay marriage"...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Paint, can I include your "children are a byproduct of married sex, at best" line in the TV ad below? See if we can get Trump to echo your words on record? That's bound to be a hit with his evangelical voters!..lol..

Yep, since I want Trump to lose and it's entirely true.

So, you just admitted your position on children's rights is so shitty that it would cause the groundswell behind Trump to disappear if he shared it with you!

Thanks for admitting you're anti-child and think of them like chattel.

The Evangelicals don't like Trump that much, he's not a Christian, and the fact that society has never done, and never will do, the best thing for children isn't new.

You seem to believe, wrongly, that if Trump says gay marriage is a done deal, just deal with it, anyone but you would care, and you're wrong. To nearly everyone that's old news and since it's here to stay, no one cares. The clock does not go backwards and you can manage a way to fuck with Trump, Godspeed...

 

[Syriusly]

Just be aware- Trump usually has people ejected from the audience if he doesn't like the question- and by acceptable question he means one that is admiring of Trump and that he is prepared to answer.

Then run the TV commercial a.[/QUOTE]

Why on earth would I do anything just because you are stomping your feet?

I am loving watching play whack a mole with each other.

Meanwhile- you will continue with your gay hate campaign regardless.

 

[Syriusly]

Paint, can I include your "children are a byproduct of married sex, at best" line in the TV ad below? See if we can get Trump to echo your words on record? That's bound to be a hit with his evangelical voters!..lol..

Yep, since I want Trump to lose and it's entirely true.

So, you just admitted your position on children's rights is so shitty.

So, you just admitted your position on children's 'rights' is all about harming the children of gay parents.

 

[Silhouette]

No Syriusly, I didn't. Paint did that. Paint said his position on children's rights other than chattel at the whims of adults was so repugnant that it would cause Trump to lose his flock if they found out he shared the same views with Paint here....

...And yet...that's the same view the democrats have as a whole. This general election is going to be a snap for whoever gets the GOP nomination: as long as that isn't Trump and his "beautiful" gay wedding stance..

 

[PaintMyHouse]

No Syriusly, I didn't. Paint did that. Paint said his position on children's rights other than chattel at the whims of adults was so repugnant that it would cause Trump to lose his flock if they found out he shared the same views with Paint here....

...And yet...that's the same view the democrats have as a whole. This general election is going to be a snap for whoever gets the GOP nomination: as long as that isn't Trump and his "beautiful" gay wedding stance..

Not what I said but I'm fine with it if Trump says "get over gay marriage" and a few nutters like you vote for some nut like Cruz. Gay marriage matters so little to so few it changes nothing.

As for children being chattel, pretty close. They were property not so long ago and mostly still are.

 

[rightwinger]

We should be more concerned with their ability to parent than their sexuality

We agree. Therefore you'll be against gay marriage since two dudes are incapable of providing the necessary mothering children need and two women are incapable of providing the necessary father-guidance they need. Two dudes are NOT ABLE to be a mother to children. Two women are NOT ABLE to be a father to children.

Trump should be asked publicly how he feels about children being legally disenfranchised from either a mother or father for life via the "gay marriage" contract. Then he should be asked if he's familiar with the Infant Doctrine's description of necessities and contract law. Then he should be asked if he's familiar with New York vs Ferber (1982) from the USSC..

Is Gay Marriage Void? New York v Ferber (1982) Etc.

Actually, we are in violent disagreement

Your claims that all heterosexuals are automatically better parents than gays is nonsense
Just read some of the horror stories of people growing up with bad parents of the opposite sex

Two "dudes" are not capable of breast feeding an infant. But they can provide a loving, nurturing home for a child to grow up in

 

[Silhouette]

No Syriusly, I didn't. Paint did that. Paint said his position on children's rights other than chattel at the whims of adults was so repugnant that it would cause Trump to lose his flock if they found out he shared the same views with Paint here....

...And yet...that's the same view the democrats have as a whole. This general election is going to be a snap for whoever gets the GOP nomination: as long as that isn't Trump and his "beautiful" gay wedding stance..

Not what I said but I'm fine with it if Trump says "get over gay marriage" and a few nutters like you vote for some nut like Cruz. Gay marriage matters so little to so few it changes nothing.

As for children being chattel, pretty close. They were property not so long ago and mostly still are.

Here's what you, in fact, said in response to my words below:

Paint, can I include your "children are a byproduct of married sex, at best" line in the TV ad below? See if we can get Trump to echo your words on record? That's bound to be a hit with his evangelical voters!..lol..

Yep, since I want Trump to lose and it's entirely true.

So your stance that children are just chattel who must "play along" with adult whims, you yourself consider a losing stance for a candidate like Trump, who is IMMENSELY popular with the middle bloc...you know...the one you need for a dem candidate you want to win...

So, got your listening ears on political strategic advisers?.....

...I'll say it again:

*******
Trump should be asked publicly how he feels about children being legally disenfranchised from either a mother or father for life via the "gay marriage" contract. Then he should be asked if he's familiar with the Infant Doctrine's description of necessities and contract law. Then he should be asked if he's familiar with New York vs Ferber (1982) from the USSC..

Is Gay Marriage Void? New York v Ferber (1982) Etc.

****

Do a TV ad if he won't talk about his comments that gay marriage is "beautiful"...and won't answer questions about how he thinks not having a mommy or daddy (as a matter of new contract, for life) might harm children..

 

[PaintMyHouse]

People who speak the truth don't win elections, Sil. What truth it is, gay marriage is a done deal, marriage isn't about children, children are still mostly property, doesn't matter. You can't handle any of those and they are all true...

 

[Silhouette]

People who speak the truth don't win elections, Sil. What truth it is, gay marriage is a done deal, marriage isn't about children, children are still mostly property, doesn't matter. You can't handle any of those and they are all true...

There you have it, gays consider children as 'mostly property", without intrinsic rights or representation of their interests in gay marriage.

Run with that guys. Take that fit, fine and firm horse and run it across the finish line.

Thank you for the LGBT honesty Paint. Thank you thank you thank you. Finally...finally it's right out there for all to see.

This will legally undo that perverse type of thinking about one of the most vulnerable demographics in the American public: Is Gay Marriage Void? New York v Ferber (1982) Etc.

 

[wrathbone]

We should be more concerned with their ability to parent than their sexuality

We agree. Therefore you'll be against gay marriage since two dudes are incapable of providing the necessary mothering children need and two women are incapable of providing the necessary father-guidance they need. Two dudes are NOT ABLE to be a mother to children. Two women are NOT ABLE to be a father to children.

Trump should be asked publicly how he feels about children being legally disenfranchised from either a mother or father for life via the "gay marriage" contract. Then he should be asked if he's familiar with the Infant Doctrine's description of necessities and contract law. Then he should be asked if he's familiar with New York vs Ferber (1982) from the USSC..

Is Gay Marriage Void? New York v Ferber (1982) Etc.

Actually, we are in violent disagreement

Your claims that all heterosexuals are automatically better parents than gays is nonsense
Just read some of the horror stories of people growing up with bad parents of the opposite sex

Two "dudes" are not capable of breast feeding an infant. But they can provide a loving, nurturing home for a child to grow up in

I totally agree. Many people have a preconceived notion that gay people are perverted, therefore deviant, therefore definitely incapable of even being 12 feet near a child. Totally wrong! I know several gay couples that have strong moral fiber and are even better than heterosexual, traditional couples. Gay men are just sexually attracted to other gay men....that's it! Funny how many still think being gay is a contagious disease or mental defect....it's not...

 

[wrathbone]

No Syriusly, I didn't. Paint did that. Paint said his position on children's rights other than chattel at the whims of adults was so repugnant that it would cause Trump to lose his flock if they found out he shared the same views with Paint here....

...And yet...that's the same view the democrats have as a whole. This general election is going to be a snap for whoever gets the GOP nomination: as long as that isn't Trump and his "beautiful" gay wedding stance..

Not what I said but I'm fine with it if Trump says "get over gay marriage" and a few nutters like you vote for some nut like Cruz. Gay marriage matters so little to so few it changes nothing.

As for children being chattel, pretty close. They were property not so long ago and mostly still are.

Here's what you, in fact, said in response to my words below:

Paint, can I include your "children are a byproduct of married sex, at best" line in the TV ad below? See if we can get Trump to echo your words on record? That's bound to be a hit with his evangelical voters!..lol..

Yep, since I want Trump to lose and it's entirely true.

So your stance that children are just chattel who must "play along" with adult whims, you yourself consider a losing stance for a candidate like Trump, who is IMMENSELY popular with the middle bloc...you know...the one you need for a dem candidate you want to win...

So, got your listening ears on political strategic advisers?.....

...I'll say it again:

*******
Trump should be asked publicly how he feels about children being legally disenfranchised from either a mother or father for life via the "gay marriage" contract. Then he should be asked if he's familiar with the Infant Doctrine's description of necessities and contract law. Then he should be asked if he's familiar with New York vs Ferber (1982) from the USSC..

Is Gay Marriage Void? New York v Ferber (1982) Etc.

****

Do a TV ad if he won't talk about his comments that gay marriage is "beautiful"...and won't answer questions about how he thinks not having a mommy or daddy (as a matter of new contract, for life) might harm children..

No one cares how Trump feels about Gay people....he doesn't care to get into your perfect little, narrow-minded micro debate, Moron!

 

[Syriusly]

No Syriusly, I didn't. ..

Sure you have- you argue in every post that the children of gay parents should be harmed.

Every single post.

 

[Syriusly]

People who speak the truth don't win elections, Sil. What truth it is, gay marriage is a done deal, marriage isn't about children, children are still mostly property, doesn't matter. You can't handle any of those and they are all true...

There you have it, gays consider children as 'mostly property".

Which 'gays' Silhouette?

Which gays?

 

[KingOfCars]

JOBS, ECONOMY, BORDER SECURITY. Who gives a shit if he is "soft" on Gay Marriage?!?!?! Evidently his supporters don't.

 

[Katzndogz]

It's not like his opinon on gay marriage is going to affect gay marriage one way or other. It's up to the people. If you object, make it known. You don't HAVE to treat gays like normal people.