Lushbo - funny and completely predictable

[Avatar4321]

I see a much stronger argument to recognize plural partner arrangements as marriages than there is to recognize Same sex relationships as marriages.

Same sex couples need to realize that no matter how hard you fight this battle, even if you win, you wont have the same rights as a man and a woman in a marriage. Because government cant give you the ability to procreate with each other. Nature and Nature's God has already made same-sex and opposite-sex relationships different and there isnt anything the government can do to change that.

Marriage exists for one reason and one reason alone: To create children and to raise them the best we can. And no matter how much you will want it otherwise, same sex relationships will never have that ability.

 

[RDD_1210]

I feel that if someone is going to make a case that homosexuals marrying each other has no impact on others than the same rule should be applied to polygamy.

Excellent. Should Obama be advocating polygamy if he is going to advocate gay 'marriage'?

More muddying the real subject with non-issues.

He'll do anything he can to avoid talking about an issue that he knows he has no argument for.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I'm tired of peoples fucked up personal sexual preferences trying to set a precendent to ruin traditional and natural balances.

I'm sick of the pubs voting for bigger and bigger govt, more control of citizens and fewer civil rights.

muddly.dullwit MUCH prefers having the Dims vote for bigger and bigger government and more and more control over citizens and the elimination of actual rights.

Childish name calling notwithstanding, it's not the Ds who are working tirelessly to take rights away from Americans.

 

[SniperFire]

I feel that if someone is going to make a case that homosexuals marrying each other has no impact on others than the same rule should be applied to polygamy.

Excellent. Should Obama be advocating polygamy if he is going to advocate gay 'marriage'?

More muddying the real subject with non-issues.

I thought the issue was 'rights' to marriage and keeping the government out of the bedroom?

Do you just draw your line on said where political expediency ends?

 

[RDD_1210]

I see a much stronger argument to recognize plural partner arrangements as marriages than there is to recognize Same sex relationships as marriages.

Same sex couples need to realize that no matter how hard you fight this battle, even if you win, you wont have the same rights as a man and a woman in a marriage. Because government cant give you the ability to procreate with each other. Nature and Nature's God has already made same-sex and opposite-sex relationships different and there isnt anything the government can do to change that.

Marriage exists for one reason and one reason alone: To create children and to raise them the best we can. And no matter how much you will want it otherwise, same sex relationships will never have that ability.

Holy fuck strawman much?

Who is asking for government to help same sex couple procreate?

I've said it before, but everytime you post something you just remind everyone how big of an idiot you truly are.

 

[Avatar4321]

Sez President Obama has declared war on marriage. Meanwhile, Ann Romney appeared on one of the morning talk shows wearing a $190 t-shirt. And how about those cute scooters they got so they can zip around the new 57 room mansion? Can't expect them to hike all the way to the car elevators.

Obviously, the romneys are just like the rest of us and have a perfect understanding of the day to day problems and issues we face.

Comforting, ain't it.

I don't think that the President has declared war on marriage.

I believe that his dopey Veep just forced him to announce what he was going to say, anyway, just sooner than had been planned.

I also don't give a crap about the issue.

But it is amusing to me that the muddly.dullwit thread headline has almost nothing to do with his post and that his post has almost nothing to do with Rush or the topic of gay marriage.

So, the thread evolved in a different direction than my op.

So what?

And if you really don't care, why so many troll posts?

Don't like the op or the posts? Golly gee, it's not like you're being forced to read or write.

Only because you are ignoring the complete double standard you have for critizing Romney for having an expensive shirt but letting the Obamas spend all they want on clothing and accessories without a peep of criticism from you.

Like I said earlier. The only difference between Romney and Obama is that Romney buys his expensive things with his money and Obama buys his with our money.

 

[Immanuel]

I'm tired of peoples fucked up personal sexual preferences trying to set a precendent to ruin traditional and natural balances.

I'm sick of the pubs voting for bigger and bigger govt, more control of citizens and fewer civil rights.

I'm sick of both parties voting for bigger and bigger govt, more control of citizens and fewer civil rights.

When we all become sick of the parties doing this, maybe we can make them understand that this country belongs to us as well.

Immie

 

[RDD_1210]

Excellent. Should Obama be advocating polygamy if he is going to advocate gay 'marriage'?

If it was an actual issue, then yes he should be consistent.

You are saying there are not people out there right now who would like to have multiple wives?

Should Obama let all of the polygamists out of jail right now?

So, are you going to answer my question or not? Or are you going to continue to ignore me?

 

[Liability]

I'm sick of the pubs voting for bigger and bigger govt, more control of citizens and fewer civil rights.

muddly.dullwit MUCH prefers having the Dims vote for bigger and bigger government and more and more control over citizens and the elimination of actual rights.

Childish name calling notwithstanding, it's not the Ds who are working tirelessly to take rights away from Americans.

Yes it is, muddly.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I see a much stronger argument to recognize plural partner arrangements as marriages than there is to recognize Same sex relationships as marriages.

Same sex couples need to realize that no matter how hard you fight this battle, even if you win, you wont have the same rights as a man and a woman in a marriage. Because government cant give you the ability to procreate with each other. Nature and Nature's God has already made same-sex and opposite-sex relationships different and there isnt anything the government can do to change that.

Marriage exists for one reason and one reason alone: To create children and to raise them the best we can. And no matter how much you will want it otherwise, same sex relationships will never have that ability.

So, all the marriages btwen partners who can't or don't procreate are ... What?

Ar York rw's planning on even more laws to sop those people from marrying?

 

[Steelplate]

I see a much stronger argument to recognize plural partner arrangements as marriages than there is to recognize Same sex relationships as marriages.

Same sex couples need to realize that no matter how hard you fight this battle, even if you win, you wont have the same rights as a man and a woman in a marriage. Because government cant give you the ability to procreate with each other. Nature and Nature's God has already made same-sex and opposite-sex relationships different and there isnt anything the government can do to change that.

Marriage exists for one reason and one reason alone: To create children and to raise them the best we can. And no matter how much you will want it otherwise, same sex relationships will never have that ability.

So people who are sterile should not get married? Or people who find out afterwards should get divorced? After all that's what you are saying is the one and only reason for marriage.

 

[SniperFire]

You want our government to allow polygamy, go through the steps that have been gone throught to allow gay marriage. I could care less. I won't stop it....but I'm not going out to push for it either. I am indifferent.

Excellent. Thanks for admitting that you could care less about it. More Americans need to understand that Leftist freaks are really talking about destroying the institution of marriage alltogether.

I love how you equate "I could care less because I don't believe in sticking my nose in other people's business" with "destroying the institution of Marriage". Goes to show your desire to CONTROL others.

Obama and the rest of your leftist freaks cannot, with a straight face, call for a redefiniton of marriage without admitting same must be inclusive of plural marriage.


Spread the word.

 

[Liability]

Sez President Obama has declared war on marriage. Meanwhile, Ann Romney appeared on one of the morning talk shows wearing a $190 t-shirt. And how about those cute scooters they got so they can zip around the new 57 room mansion? Can't expect them to hike all the way to the car elevators.

Obviously, the romneys are just like the rest of us and have a perfect understanding of the day to day problems and issues we face.

Comforting, ain't it.

I don't think that the President has declared war on marriage.

I believe that his dopey Veep just forced him to announce what he was going to say, anyway, just sooner than had been planned.

I also don't give a crap about the issue.

But it is amusing to me that the muddly.dullwit thread headline has almost nothing to do with his post and that his post has almost nothing to do with Rush or the topic of gay marriage.

So, the thread evolved in a different direction than my op.

So what?

And if you really don't care, why so many troll posts?

Don't like the op or the posts? Golly gee, it's not like you're being forced to read or write.

No no. Your OP announced one topic but you, alone, IN your own absurd thread-starting post, then morphed it into some blather about Romney and his wife and how they are evil because they have wealth.

You are too dopey to have a conversation with others when you can't even stick to your own topic in one post, ya hapless dimwit.

 

[Immanuel]

I'm sick of the pubs voting for bigger and bigger govt, more control of citizens and fewer civil rights.

muddly.dullwit MUCH prefers having the Dims vote for bigger and bigger government and more and more control over citizens and the elimination of actual rights.

Childish name calling notwithstanding, it's not the Ds who are working tirelessly to take rights away from Americans.

Not true, may I remind you of NDAA and Obamacare? Edit: and Anwar al-Awlaki?

Both parties are working towards the same goal but from different angles.

Immie

 

[Dick Tuck]

 

[Luddly Neddite]

If it was an actual issue, then yes he should be consistent.

You are saying there are not people out there right now who would like to have multiple wives?

Should Obama let all of the polygamists out of jail right now?

So, are you going to answer my question or not? Or are you going to continue to ignore me?

The answer to yhat is in her repeated sidestepping.

She's a coward.

 

[Avatar4321]

I see a much stronger argument to recognize plural partner arrangements as marriages than there is to recognize Same sex relationships as marriages.

Same sex couples need to realize that no matter how hard you fight this battle, even if you win, you wont have the same rights as a man and a woman in a marriage. Because government cant give you the ability to procreate with each other. Nature and Nature's God has already made same-sex and opposite-sex relationships different and there isnt anything the government can do to change that.

Marriage exists for one reason and one reason alone: To create children and to raise them the best we can. And no matter how much you will want it otherwise, same sex relationships will never have that ability.

Holy fuck strawman much?

Who is asking for government to help same sex couple procreate?

I've said it before, but everytime you post something you just remind everyone how big of an idiot you truly are.

Do you have any idea what a straw man is? The center of this entire debate is the pro gay marriage groups want the government to give homosexual couples the same rights as everyone else. correct? The government cant physically do that because no matter how much you complain and moan there will always be an inherent inequality because they can't procreate together.

Since the only reason government recognizes marriages to begin with is it's public interest to ensure the perpetuation of the species, and homosexual couples cannot procreate, there is absolutely no public interest in recognizing said relationships.

Just because you cant understand arguments doesnt mean those making them are stupid. I am going to take the fact that you have to resort to insults that you are unable to counter my points.

 

[SniperFire]

If it was an actual issue, then yes he should be consistent.

You are saying there are not people out there right now who would like to have multiple wives?

Should Obama let all of the polygamists out of jail right now?

So, are you going to answer my question or not? Or are you going to continue to ignore me?

Honestly, I rarely read your posts beyond the first line.

 

[Liability]

You are saying there are not people out there right now who would like to have multiple wives?

Should Obama let all of the polygamists out of jail right now?

So, are you going to answer my question or not? Or are you going to continue to ignore me?

Honestly, I rarely read your posts beyond the first line.

He posts more than one line?

 

[SniperFire]

Clint is a fag.