It's easier to condemn homosexuality

[Pop23]

You missed the "if" part.

No, I didn't. You must not be proficient in English. You said "same sex siblings....and then "if one was of the opposite sex".....ergo, they cannot be same sex siblings if one is of the opposite sex.

BINGO

Your bigotry toward these sisters are based on the fact that. Brother/sister has the ability to procreate.

 

[Pop23]

Can you explain how two hetrosexual sisters, wishing to marry for the benefits and protections afforded others and to help in the raising of their children is incest?

Thank you in advance

So you think that sisters cannot be gay?

Incest:
sexual relations between people classed as being too closely related to marry each other

Now post the part of the law in which sex is a requirement, and my argument is that the sisters are heterosexuals

I know this is hard for you to beleive (which is strange), there actually are people that don't want to have sex with members of their own gender.

True story.

Why do you keep posing the same questions that have been answered ad nauseam?

Is it insanity or stupidity?

In your case only a good clinical psychologist could answer that.

I asked one. She said it was pure stupidity and bigotry on your part. Good advice, thanks.

(Means I can read and laugh at your posts in a dismissive manner)

If she's the same one that told you society will ever accept homosexuality as normal, I'd get a full And complete refund.

 

[Pop23]

Can you explain how two hetrosexual sisters, wishing to marry for the benefits and protections afforded others and to help in the raising of their children is incest?

Thank you in advance

So you think that sisters cannot be gay?

Incest:
sexual relations between people classed as being too closely related to marry each other

Now post the part of the law in which sex is a requirement, and my argument is that the sisters are heterosexuals

I know this is hard for you to beleive (which is strange), there actually are people that don't want to have sex with members of their own gender.

True story.

Why do you keep posing the same questions that have been answered ad nauseam?

Is it insanity or stupidity?

In your case only a good clinical psychologist could answer that.

I asked one. She said it was pure stupidity and bigotry on your part. Good advice, thanks.

(Means I can read and laugh at your posts in a dismissive manner)

You do realize that when an abnormal person laughs at a normal person.....

Well, that's simply kinda sad b

 

[Mertex]

If she's the same one that told you society will ever accept homosexuality as normal,

Newflash: Society has accepted homosexuality in the US as was proven with the Supreme Court legalizing ssm.

 

[Pop23]

If she's the same one that told you society will ever accept homosexuality as normal,

Newflash: Society has accepted homosexuality in the US as was proven with the Supreme Court legalizing ssm.

Oh, just like it accepted slavery and women as chattal.

Got it

 

[Skylar]

If she's the same one that told you society will ever accept homosexuality as normal,

Newflash: Society has accepted homosexuality in the US as was proven with the Supreme Court legalizing ssm.

Oh, just like it accepted slavery and women as chattal.

Got it

Homosexuality isn't slavery. Just shredding your analogy.

But then, same sex marriage isn't incest. So False Analogy fallacies are apparently your bread and butter.

 

[Skylar]

Because marriage should be only between a man and a women, not too closely related and to create a new family where none previously existed.

Not anymore. The law has been changed. The "not too closely related" law hasn't changed. When enough people are able to convince the country that it needs to, then maybe it will, but I seriously doubt it. Most people still abhor incest, whether it is reproducing or not.

Can you explain how two hetrosexual sisters, wishing to marry for the benefits and protections afforded others and to help in the raising of their children is incest?

Thank you in advance

So you think that sisters cannot be gay?

Incest:
sexual relations between people classed as being too closely related to marry each other

Now post the part of the law in which sex is a requirement, and my argument is that the sisters are heterosexuals

I know this is hard for you to beleive (which is strange), there actually are people that don't want to have sex with members of their own gender.

True story.

Why do you keep posing the same questions that have been answered ad nauseam?

Is it insanity or stupidity?

A desire to shut down the topic.

 

[Mertex]

If she's the same one that told you society will ever accept homosexuality as normal,

Newflash: Society has accepted homosexuality in the US as was proven with the Supreme Court legalizing ssm.

Oh, just like it accepted slavery and women as chattal.

Got it

As a matter of fact....yes....and it was changed. When you feel you have enough people to change the mind of the country.....by all means do so!

 

[Syriusly]

Because marriage should be only between a man and a women, not too closely related and to create a new family where none previously existed.

Not anymore. The law has been changed. The "not too closely related" law hasn't changed. When enough people are able to convince the country that it needs to, then maybe it will, but I seriously doubt it. Most people still abhor incest, whether it is reproducing or not.

Can you explain how two hetrosexual sisters, wishing to marry for the benefits and protections afforded others and to help in the raising of their children is incest?

Thank you in advance

So you think that sisters cannot be gay?

Incest:
sexual relations between people classed as being too closely related to marry each other

Now post the part of the law in which sex is a requirement, and my argument is that the sisters are heterosexuals

I know this is hard for you to beleive (which is strange), there actually are people that don't want to have sex with members of their own gender.

True story.

Why do you keep posing the same questions that have been answered ad nauseam?

Is it insanity or stupidity?

Bigotry and dishonesty.

That is the root of all of Pop's posts where he tries to equate homosexuality to incest.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Society accepted homosexuality long before SSM. Would say acceptance occured when you couldn't lock up homosexuals any more for being homosexuals.

 

[Mertex]

BINGO

Your bigotry toward these sisters are based on the fact that. Brother/sister has the ability to procreate.

You're really insane. I'm not bigoted toward these imaginary sisters, I'm stating the law. And why are you deflecting. The post was about your inability to comprehend good English. Same sex siblings cannot be same sex siblings if one is of the opposite sex.

 

[Syriusly]

No- I just point out what liar you are- and a bigot.

I support the right of same gender couples to marry- you want to discriminate against them.

Because you are bigoted against homosexuals.

I have said quite clearly that if you want to fight for your right to marry your sister- you have the same right to pursue that as gay couples did- and that if the State cannot provide a compelling reason to prevent you from marrying, then the law should be overturned.

You apparently can't come up with any reason for siblings not to marry. I have pointed out that the courts have come up with other reasons.

The only bigots here are you and Boss.

Again.

Oh, indeed not, I'm showing that same sex marriage advocates are perhaps the biggest bigots there are. Let me post a perfect example.

Both of the following female couples wish to marry so that they can share the benefits and protections of the institution. All four of the couples are single mothers and by marrying, they feel they can better raise their children.

Couple A: Mary and June

Couple B: Mary and June.

Which of the above couple is denied the right to Marry?

Based on the information you provide, none of them should be denied under current law. However, if June in couple A happens to be a cow, then they should be denied.
If Mary in couple B happens to be a child, then they should be denied also. What's your point?

Cows and children are not eligible marry,

Exactly, that is why it would be denied.

Ok, since you need to deflect I will add:

All are over the age of consent, and all are human beings.

Again, based on just that information, they are all allowed. But, if one of the couples are siblings, they would be denied because there is a law that prohibits it. What is your problem understanding that? If you want to change that law, then you need to write your Congressman, or convince enough people that it is okay. You can't do something that is against the law....don't you understand that?

What possible societal harm comes from allowing the couple made up of same sex heterosexual sisters the right to marry so they can enjoy those benefits and to help raise their children?.

Once again- I refer to the language of the court. Remember, you don't need to convince us that you can marry your sibling- you need to convince the court

For example, polygamy and incest
raise concerns about abuse, exploitation and threats to the social safety net.

 

[Boss]

If there is enough interest in the country, like there was for same-sex marriage for gays, then I'm sure that it will be brought up and it is up to the country to decide....

Hold on! ...We didn't let the country decide on gay marriage. We let the court legislate it from the bench. They aren't elected by the people, there is no political consequence for them. This was clearly NOT decided by The People, and I think that is what some people's big issue here is. I am all in favor of allowing states to have votes and decide if they want to marry gay couples. It's the involvement of the federal government and SCOTUS that I am concerned with. Especially, the tampering and fiddling with the Constitution! There was no "rights" issue here. There was no need for SCOTUS to hear this case.

 

[Pop23]

If she's the same one that told you society will ever accept homosexuality as normal,

Newflash: Society has accepted homosexuality in the US as was proven with the Supreme Court legalizing ssm.

Oh, just like it accepted slavery and women as chattal.

Got it

Homosexuality isn't slavery. Just shredding your analogy.

But then, same sex marriage isn't incest. So False Analogy fallacies are apparently your bread and butter.

So how do two heterosexual single mothers that are sisters qualified as being incestuous?

Go ahead, give it a shot?

 

[Syriusly]

If there is enough interest in the country, like there was for same-sex marriage for gays, then I'm sure that it will be brought up and it is up to the country to decide....

Hold on! ...We didn't let the country decide on gay marriage. We let the court legislate it from the bench. .

You are still upset about the court deciding for the country that mixed race couples have a right to marry- aren't you?

You are still calling that 'legislating' from the bench right? When you hang out with your 'gay friends' and tell them how pissed off you are that the courts- not the States- allowed mix race couples to marry?

 

[Pop23]

Oh, indeed not, I'm showing that same sex marriage advocates are perhaps the biggest bigots there are. Let me post a perfect example.

Both of the following female couples wish to marry so that they can share the benefits and protections of the institution. All four of the couples are single mothers and by marrying, they feel they can better raise their children.

Couple A: Mary and June

Couple B: Mary and June.

Which of the above couple is denied the right to Marry?

Based on the information you provide, none of them should be denied under current law. However, if June in couple A happens to be a cow, then they should be denied.
If Mary in couple B happens to be a child, then they should be denied also. What's your point?

Cows and children are not eligible marry,

Exactly, that is why it would be denied.

Ok, since you need to deflect I will add:

All are over the age of consent, and all are human beings.

Again, based on just that information, they are all allowed. But, if one of the couples are siblings, they would be denied because there is a law that prohibits it. What is your problem understanding that? If you want to change that law, then you need to write your Congressman, or convince enough people that it is okay. You can't do something that is against the law....don't you understand that?

What possible societal harm comes from allowing the couple made up of same sex heterosexual sisters the right to marry so they can enjoy those benefits and to help raise their children?.

Once again- I refer to the language of the court. Remember, you don't need to convince us that you can marry your sibling- you need to convince the court

For example, polygamy and incest
raise concerns about abuse, exploitation and threats to the social safety net.

Why do I have to convince a judge? A human right or a civil right exusts with or without a court order.

Of course a bigot like you would think I'm such simplistic terms.

So what is the societal harm caused by two heterosexual sisters marrying so that their children can be better raised?

I await your attempt at independent thought.

 

[Pop23]

If there is enough interest in the country, like there was for same-sex marriage for gays, then I'm sure that it will be brought up and it is up to the country to decide....

Hold on! ...We didn't let the country decide on gay marriage. We let the court legislate it from the bench. .

You are still upset about the court deciding for the country that mixed race couples have a right to marry- aren't you?

You are still calling that 'legislating' from the bench right? When you hang out with your 'gay friends' and tell them how pissed off you are that the courts- not the States- allowed mix race couples to marry?

How does mixed race marriage change the concept of one man to one woman?

Think on your own much, or does your bigotry run your entire life?

 

[Pop23]

Society accepted homosexuality long before SSM. Would say acceptance occured when you couldn't lock up homosexuals any more for being homosexuals.

There are many groups that society shuns, not all are in jail.

 

[Pop23]

Not anymore. The law has been changed. The "not too closely related" law hasn't changed. When enough people are able to convince the country that it needs to, then maybe it will, but I seriously doubt it. Most people still abhor incest, whether it is reproducing or not.

Can you explain how two hetrosexual sisters, wishing to marry for the benefits and protections afforded others and to help in the raising of their children is incest?

Thank you in advance

So you think that sisters cannot be gay?

Incest:
sexual relations between people classed as being too closely related to marry each other

Now post the part of the law in which sex is a requirement, and my argument is that the sisters are heterosexuals

I know this is hard for you to beleive (which is strange), there actually are people that don't want to have sex with members of their own gender.

True story.

Why do you keep posing the same questions that have been answered ad nauseam?

Is it insanity or stupidity?

Bigotry and dishonesty.

That is the root of all of Pop's posts where he tries to equate homosexuality to incest.

Yet I am the one who constantly asked how two same sex heterosexual sisters could be associated with the act of incest when, by nature, they would not have sex?

Is the lack of sex what's upsetting you?

What's the opposite of Kinky?

 

[Skylar]

If she's the same one that told you society will ever accept homosexuality as normal,

Newflash: Society has accepted homosexuality in the US as was proven with the Supreme Court legalizing ssm.

Oh, just like it accepted slavery and women as chattal.

Got it

Homosexuality isn't slavery. Just shredding your analogy.

But then, same sex marriage isn't incest. So False Analogy fallacies are apparently your bread and butter.

So how do two heterosexual single mothers that are sisters qualified as being incestuous?

Go ahead, give it a shot?

Who said that they did?

Go ahead, give it a shot. While you're struggling, I'll keep laughing at your last false analogy fallacy.

Deal?