Religious Right Wing Bigots Still Obsessing About Marriage-Get a Life!

[Lysistrata]

Not for you to say. Not for this Brown to say. There is too wide a variety of people in the world who are Christians. You have to be much more specific than just referring to some sort of "attack on Christianity." Shoot. I used to work with a gay guy who is Christian and has taught Sunday school. Buttigieg was married in church. You are free to practice your own form of Christianity as long as you don't interfere with others.

This is a laugh, as libs attack leading ministers who oppose abominations like Homosexual Marriage or Cutting and Running, as "unchristian". President Trump has been attacked by libs as not a True Christian as well.

What's good for the good is good for the gander

I don't know who a "lib" actually is. These "ministers" chose to enter the political arena in an aggressive and highly insulting attempt to interfere with the public/civil rights of a whole group of people, of all faiths and none; a group of people defined by their sexual orientation rather than their religious views. Are you saying that people should not oppose them when these ministers seek to justify themselves by reference to their particular faith? How would you handle this sort of "asymmetrical" situation?

We are not all members of the same faith. And these people do not understand that religion is not a competitive sport.

That's one way to spin it.

But ministers would point out that it is a theological fact that Almighty God put Adam and Eve into the garden , not Adam and Steve, and He just doesn't approve of homosexuality. I guess you can spin taking it in the ass as a "civil right", but that has not been the position of Christian theologians since antiquity

There is no such thing as a "theological fact." The only thing that a theologian can offer is an opinion.

 

[Correll]

3. Your spin that everything you want is a "Right" is an effective tactic. But it is unsupported by anything other than your dominance of media. Saying some thing over and over again worked on the nation as a whole, but one on one, like right here, it makes you look dishonest. Because it is dishonest.

What exactly did I say about rights? I said that it is a civil rights issue because a group was being arbitrarily excluded from an institution that others were able to take participation in for granted. I never said that marriage -in and of itself is a right, although SCOTUS has on numerous occaisions. That is a useless argument I can't believe that I have to explain all of this to you.

Are men and women different?

Is that really your best shot ,Dude?

Don't need my best shot for this.



Are men and women different?

 

[rightwinger]

Gays have been getting married for over a decade now

The world has not ended, the institution of marriage has survived, millions of children have not been turned gay

Actually, the institution of Gay "Marriage" has existed for more than a decade, they were conducting these ceremonies on the Springer Program in the 20th Century- and gay marriage was first piloted by homosexuals in the our penitentiary system even before then.

Further, there has been an exponential increase in non-binary sexuality over the past couple of decades. Normative children really seem to be neglected. When I was a kid, we had Duke Wayne, Lee Marvin and other normative folks to emulate.

Neither Duke Wayne or Lee Marvin we’re known for their family values

 

[rightwinger]

Not for you to say. Not for this Brown to say. There is too wide a variety of people in the world who are Christians. You have to be much more specific than just referring to some sort of "attack on Christianity." Shoot. I used to work with a gay guy who is Christian and has taught Sunday school. Buttigieg was married in church. You are free to practice your own form of Christianity as long as you don't interfere with others.

This is a laugh, as libs attack leading ministers who oppose abominations like Homosexual Marriage or Cutting and Running, as "unchristian". President Trump has been attacked by libs as not a True Christian as well.

What's good for the good is good for the gander

I don't know who a "lib" actually is. These "ministers" chose to enter the political arena in an aggressive and highly insulting attempt to interfere with the public/civil rights of a whole group of people, of all faiths and none; a group of people defined by their sexual orientation rather than their religious views. Are you saying that people should not oppose them when these ministers seek to justify themselves by reference to their particular faith? How would you handle this sort of "asymmetrical" situation?

We are not all members of the same faith. And these people do not understand that religion is not a competitive sport.

That's one way to spin it.

But ministers would point out that it is a theological fact that Almighty God put Adam and Eve into the garden , not Adam and Steve, and He just doesn't approve of homosexuality. I guess you can spin taking it in the ass as a "civil right", but that has not been the position of Christian theologians since antiquity

Adam was a homo

 

[Polishprince]

Not for you to say. Not for this Brown to say. There is too wide a variety of people in the world who are Christians. You have to be much more specific than just referring to some sort of "attack on Christianity." Shoot. I used to work with a gay guy who is Christian and has taught Sunday school. Buttigieg was married in church. You are free to practice your own form of Christianity as long as you don't interfere with others.

This is a laugh, as libs attack leading ministers who oppose abominations like Homosexual Marriage or Cutting and Running, as "unchristian". President Trump has been attacked by libs as not a True Christian as well.

What's good for the good is good for the gander

I don't know who a "lib" actually is. These "ministers" chose to enter the political arena in an aggressive and highly insulting attempt to interfere with the public/civil rights of a whole group of people, of all faiths and none; a group of people defined by their sexual orientation rather than their religious views. Are you saying that people should not oppose them when these ministers seek to justify themselves by reference to their particular faith? How would you handle this sort of "asymmetrical" situation?

We are not all members of the same faith. And these people do not understand that religion is not a competitive sport.

That's one way to spin it.

But ministers would point out that it is a theological fact that Almighty God put Adam and Eve into the garden , not Adam and Steve, and He just doesn't approve of homosexuality. I guess you can spin taking it in the ass as a "civil right", but that has not been the position of Christian theologians since antiquity

Adam was a homo

Your view that Adam took it in the ass is at odds with a lot of theological opinions you know.

 

[Polishprince]

Gays have been getting married for over a decade now

The world has not ended, the institution of marriage has survived, millions of children have not been turned gay

Actually, the institution of Gay "Marriage" has existed for more than a decade, they were conducting these ceremonies on the Springer Program in the 20th Century- and gay marriage was first piloted by homosexuals in the our penitentiary system even before then.

Further, there has been an exponential increase in non-binary sexuality over the past couple of decades. Normative children really seem to be neglected. When I was a kid, we had Duke Wayne, Lee Marvin and other normative folks to emulate.

Neither Duke Wayne or Lee Marvin we’re known for their family values

John Wayne had 3 successful interracial marriages, he was definitely committed to equal rights.

 

[Lysistrata]

Not for you to say. Not for this Brown to say. There is too wide a variety of people in the world who are Christians. You have to be much more specific than just referring to some sort of "attack on Christianity." Shoot. I used to work with a gay guy who is Christian and has taught Sunday school. Buttigieg was married in church. You are free to practice your own form of Christianity as long as you don't interfere with others.

This is a laugh, as libs attack leading ministers who oppose abominations like Homosexual Marriage or Cutting and Running, as "unchristian". President Trump has been attacked by libs as not a True Christian as well.

What's good for the good is good for the gander

I don't know who a "lib" actually is. These "ministers" chose to enter the political arena in an aggressive and highly insulting attempt to interfere with the public/civil rights of a whole group of people, of all faiths and none; a group of people defined by their sexual orientation rather than their religious views. Are you saying that people should not oppose them when these ministers seek to justify themselves by reference to their particular faith? How would you handle this sort of "asymmetrical" situation?

We are not all members of the same faith. And these people do not understand that religion is not a competitive sport.

That's one way to spin it.

But ministers would point out that it is a theological fact that Almighty God put Adam and Eve into the garden , not Adam and Steve, and He just doesn't approve of homosexuality. I guess you can spin taking it in the ass as a "civil right", but that has not been the position of Christian theologians since antiquity

Adam was a homo

Your view that Adam took it in the ass is at odds with a lot of theological opinions you know.

Who cares? What does some preoccupation about adam or any other human being, taking "it in the ass" have anything to do with religion? This sounds more like you have a sexual preoccupation that has something to do with how you perceive yourself as a "man," which I actually think dates back to an idea that a person who plays the "pitcher" role in sexual intercourse is better than a person who plays the "catcher" role.

Do you want to discuss the treatment of women and our bodies now? Women's bodies being the spoils of war, or traded among families? Sold for sexual purposes? This does not have anything whatsoever to do with any belief in a Supreme Being/Universal Creator.

I don't give a rat's ass about some theologian's opinions. No one knows who the Supreme Being is or can do, assuming that such a being exists. Many, most of these theologian's' opinions have been offered by a small number of males in times when the other half of the population were both kept illiterate and excluded from religious organizations. So there has never been a voice for one-half of the population to express their thinking on this issues.

Before you can elevate someone's conclusions to "wisdom," you must account for the people who were excluded deliberately.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Gays have been getting married for over a decade now

The world has not ended, the institution of marriage has survived, millions of children have not been turned gay

Actually, the institution of Gay "Marriage" has existed for more than a decade, they were conducting these ceremonies on the Springer Program in the 20th Century- and gay marriage was first piloted by homosexuals in the our penitentiary system even before then.

Further, there has been an exponential increase in non-binary sexuality over the past couple of decades. Normative children really seem to be neglected. When I was a kid, we had Duke Wayne, Lee Marvin and other normative folks to emulate.

Neither Duke Wayne or Lee Marvin we’re known for their family values

John Wayne had 3 successful interracial marriages, he was definitely committed to equal rights.

He was divorced twice you fucking moron


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Polishprince]

Gays have been getting married for over a decade now

The world has not ended, the institution of marriage has survived, millions of children have not been turned gay

Actually, the institution of Gay "Marriage" has existed for more than a decade, they were conducting these ceremonies on the Springer Program in the 20th Century- and gay marriage was first piloted by homosexuals in the our penitentiary system even before then.

Further, there has been an exponential increase in non-binary sexuality over the past couple of decades. Normative children really seem to be neglected. When I was a kid, we had Duke Wayne, Lee Marvin and other normative folks to emulate.

Neither Duke Wayne or Lee Marvin we’re known for their family values

John Wayne had 3 successful interracial marriages, he was definitely committed to equal rights.

He was divorced twice you fucking moron


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you are against divorce?

Why the sudden hyperpuritanism from liberalism- especially after so many decades of insisting on easy, no-fault divorce laws? Sort of hypocritical, eh?

 

[Correll]

3. Your spin that everything you want is a "Right" is an effective tactic. But it is unsupported by anything other than your dominance of media. Saying some thing over and over again worked on the nation as a whole, but one on one, like right here, it makes you look dishonest. Because it is dishonest.

What exactly did I say about rights? I said that it is a civil rights issue because a group was being arbitrarily excluded from an institution that others were able to take participation in for granted. I never said that marriage -in and of itself is a right, although SCOTUS has on numerous occaisions. That is a useless argument I can't believe that I have to explain all of this to you.

Are men and women different?

Is that really your best shot ,Dude?

Don't need my best shot for this.



Are men and women different?

Answer or admit that you do not know.

 

[G.T.]

Gays have been getting married for over a decade now

The world has not ended, the institution of marriage has survived, millions of children have not been turned gay

Actually, the institution of Gay "Marriage" has existed for more than a decade, they were conducting these ceremonies on the Springer Program in the 20th Century- and gay marriage was first piloted by homosexuals in the our penitentiary system even before then.

Further, there has been an exponential increase in non-binary sexuality over the past couple of decades. Normative children really seem to be neglected. When I was a kid, we had Duke Wayne, Lee Marvin and other normative folks to emulate.

Neither Duke Wayne or Lee Marvin we’re known for their family values

John Wayne had 3 successful interracial marriages, he was definitely committed to equal rights.

He was divorced twice you fucking moron


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you are against divorce?

Why the sudden hyperpuritanism from liberalism- especially after so many decades of insisting on easy, no-fault divorce laws? Sort of hypocritical, eh?

You said "3 successful marriages"...

surely, you understand that that's an oxymoron. If theres more than 1, surely you understand that 2 were unsuccessful...unless someone died.

 

[Muhammed]

I really have to wonder about people who devote their so called lives to trying to deny others what they can take for granted- Specifically marriage. Meet Brian Brown of the National Organization for (Straight ) Marriage who is obsessing about Mayor Pete Buttigieg and who thinks that he can get marriage equality reversed:

Mayor Pete’s Marriage is Bogus and the Trumpified SCOTUS Will Agree, Says Brian Brown | Right Wing Watch

You would have thought that the NOM would have closed up shop after they, and other such organizations got slapped down with the Obergefell decision. But, they are still here. I guess that you have to give them credit for perseverance. Or, is it a religious psychosis manifested by obsessive compulsive focus on other people's marriages. ? Lets see what he has to say:

In a Friday afternoon fundraising email from the National Organization for Marriage, Brown slammed Buttigieg’s marriage as illegitimate: “Mr. Buttigieg may consider himself married to another man, but that relationship is not marriage, and no judicial decree or political act can ever make it so.”

So Brian, suck it up and shut up.....and work on your own life while you're at it .


An OP should be 3-4 paragraphs, link and content.
Edited

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines


TheProgressivePatriot

There is no vast right wing conspiracy to prevent you from being a disgusting whiny fagboy.

Grow up!

 

[G.T.]

I really have to wonder about people who devote their so called lives to trying to deny others what they can take for granted- Specifically marriage. Meet Brian Brown of the National Organization for (Straight ) Marriage who is obsessing about Mayor Pete Buttigieg and who thinks that he can get marriage equality reversed:

Mayor Pete’s Marriage is Bogus and the Trumpified SCOTUS Will Agree, Says Brian Brown | Right Wing Watch

You would have thought that the NOM would have closed up shop after they, and other such organizations got slapped down with the Obergefell decision. But, they are still here. I guess that you have to give them credit for perseverance. Or, is it a religious psychosis manifested by obsessive compulsive focus on other people's marriages. ? Lets see what he has to say:

In a Friday afternoon fundraising email from the National Organization for Marriage, Brown slammed Buttigieg’s marriage as illegitimate: “Mr. Buttigieg may consider himself married to another man, but that relationship is not marriage, and no judicial decree or political act can ever make it so.”

So Brian, suck it up and shut up.....and work on your own life while you're at it .


An OP should be 3-4 paragraphs, link and content.
Edited

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines


TheProgressivePatriot

There is no vast right wing conspiracy to prevent you from being a whiny fag.

Grow up,!

Nah, youre right its just a couple old fucks left in the litter that actually think the sex you fuck is a virtue.

 

[Lysistrata]

John Wayne (Marion Morrison) was not some sort of moral hero. Neither was Ronald Reagan. (child born to Nancy and him less than nine months after their marriage). Now the same people who knock film actors also market actors as "heroes." There was a hilarious post in the last two days of someone praising John Wayne and Lee Marvin as some sort of heroes, but the poster apparently also hates "Hollywood," i.e. actors.

Personally, I like actors. I think that acting is a very cerebral endeavor, as an actor has to understand the psychology of the character whom s/he is playing in order to portray that character well. I took some writing, dialogue, and screenwriting courses. The professors always made us write out a CV for all of our characters, which did not necessarily appear in the finished story. It was just that we had to understand the characters we were creating. Example: James Bond, 007, had parents and once was ten years old. So how did he come to be 007?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

3. Your spin that everything you want is a "Right" is an effective tactic. But it is unsupported by anything other than your dominance of media. Saying some thing over and over again worked on the nation as a whole, but one on one, like right here, it makes you look dishonest. Because it is dishonest.

What exactly did I say about rights? I said that it is a civil rights issue because a group was being arbitrarily excluded from an institution that others were able to take participation in for granted. I never said that marriage -in and of itself is a right, although SCOTUS has on numerous occaisions. That is a useless argument I can't believe that I have to explain all of this to you.

Are men and women different?

Is that really your best shot ,Dude?

Don't need my best shot for this.



Are men and women different?

Answer or admit that you do not know.

Not answering a stupid question that has no relevance to the discussion


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Correll]

What exactly did I say about rights? I said that it is a civil rights issue because a group was being arbitrarily excluded from an institution that others were able to take participation in for granted. I never said that marriage -in and of itself is a right, although SCOTUS has on numerous occaisions. That is a useless argument I can't believe that I have to explain all of this to you.

Are men and women different?

Is that really your best shot ,Dude?

Don't need my best shot for this.



Are men and women different?

Answer or admit that you do not know.

Not answering a stupid question that has no relevance to the discussion


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Either you can see where I am going with this question, and you are lying when you say it is not relevant,


or you CAN'T see where I am going with this question, and you are lying, by pretending to know anything about it being relevant.



OR, slim possibility, you know where I am going, and have a bizarre way of imagining that my question is not relevant.



Answer the question.


Are men and women different?

 

[G.T.]

Are men and women different?

Is that really your best shot ,Dude?

Don't need my best shot for this.



Are men and women different?

Answer or admit that you do not know.

Not answering a stupid question that has no relevance to the discussion


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Either you can see where I am going with this question, and you are lying when you say it is not relevant,


or you CAN'T see where I am going with this question, and you are lying, by pretending to know anything about it being relevant.



OR, slim possibility, you know where I am going, and have a bizarre way of imagining that my question is not relevant.



Answer the question.


Are men and women different?

It's a dumb question in virtue of the lack of specificity.

Men and MEN are "different," it depends on what you mean by different and why you're invoking the question.

 

[Unkotare]

Is this argument still going on? Didn't the Supreme Court settle this for all practical purposes?

 

[miketx]

I really have to wonder about people who devote their so called lives to trying to deny others what they can take for granted- Specifically marriage. Meet Brian Brown of the National Organization for (Straight ) Marriage who is obsessing about Mayor Pete Buttigieg and who thinks that he can get marriage equality reversed:

Mayor Pete’s Marriage is Bogus and the Trumpified SCOTUS Will Agree, Says Brian Brown | Right Wing Watch

You would have thought that the NOM would have closed up shop after they, and other such organizations got slapped down with the Obergefell decision. But, they are still here. I guess that you have to give them credit for perseverance. Or, is it a religious psychosis manifested by obsessive compulsive focus on other people's marriages. ? Lets see what he has to say:

In a Friday afternoon fundraising email from the National Organization for Marriage, Brown slammed Buttigieg’s marriage as illegitimate: “Mr. Buttigieg may consider himself married to another man, but that relationship is not marriage, and no judicial decree or political act can ever make it so.”

So Brian, suck it up and shut up.....and work on your own life while you're at it .


An OP should be 3-4 paragraphs, link and content.
Edited

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines


TheProgressivePatriot

No one devotes their life to do anything to keep you queers apart.

 

[Polishprince]

Is this argument still going on? Didn't the Supreme Court settle this for all practical purposes?

Not really. There is a question as to whether or not the decision should be reversed or not.

Plessey v Ferguson wasn't the last word either