...That is quite a delusional rant, clearly born of desperation and despair. It must e hard being you. So angry and alienated. So fearful of change and unable to accept the reality of progress. I might have to live with and deal with people like you but I thank the Gods and the Goddesses that I am not you . Have a nice day
Desperation and despair?
Hardly.
Merely a harbinger of what's coming.
Angry?
Yes.
The Supreme Court ruling was wrong, in connection with the best interests of The People and the Republic.
Alienated?
Hardly.
I side with the 97% of my fellow countrymen, whose interests lie in direct contrast to the interests of the 3%, for whom this abortion of a ruling was crafted.
I am in very large and very excellent company.
As to progress...
The legitimizing and mainstreaming of sexual deviancy and perversion (homosexuality) is not progress.
It is a downward slide into a cesspool of filth, degeneracy, licentiousness and emasculation of the Nation; going the way of other nations who inflicted themselves with thsi disease.
Progress? More like a shift towards national suicide.
As to personal references... thank you for your input.
OK Kondor, I have two assignments for you should you choose to accept them ( and I suggest that you do if you want to establish any credibility here)
1. Explain unemotionally and in objective and unambiguous terms- without the use of pejoratives such as “ sexual pervert” EXACTLY how same sex marriage is detrimental to the best interest of the country and to those who are not directly involved in it.
You might want to look at various jurisdictions-foreign and domestic where same sex marriage has been in effect for over a decade ( you have several choices) and tell us what negative effects on those societies have emerged. Please be sure to use observable, measurable, and verifiable criteria.
Please also be sure to avoid simple correlations that do not control for intervening variables. Rather you are asked to establish a cause and effect relationship. Remember also, we are talking specifically about same sex marriage, not homosexuality in general.
2. Critique the Obergefell decision in terms of constitutional law which includes binding precedents established by case law and explain how you believe that the court could have found for the defendants in that case. Keep in mind that prior to the oral arguments, at the time that the court accepted the case, it was established that the ruling would be based on the 14th amendment so your argument must also be based on that amendment.
Also keep in mind that for the government to deny a group or an individual something that they are claiming as a right that others enjoy, a compelling government interest-or at minimum a rational basis must be established, so your argument must address what the interest or rational basis might be.
For both assignments, please provide appropriate source documentation for all points presented as fact. Good luck. This should keep you out of troubles for a while and may even make you a better person