Lol, I so love the way the liberals make up such wonderful words like homophibic. It's not phobic to consider homoseuxality to be a deviant behavior because it is deviant and it's certainly not phobic to consider it to be immoral behavior, because that is a belief based upon your relgious beliefs therefore not irrational at all. Like I said, it's a tactic used by many sodomites and liberals against many who don't hold the opinion that homosexuality is the next best thing to sliced white bread. You speak against the mainstreaming of the homosexual lifestyle or against the total acceptance of all things "gay", you must therefore be a closet homosexual. Lol, too funny. If there was any truth to that I would be a closet gay, liberal, muslim.
Bigots like yourself used to say a black man marrying a white woman was immoral. While I personally don't like the idea, It has nothing to do with it being immoral, it has to do with my own personal feelings. Nothing immoral about it slick, so you're wrong.
Such a belief is irrational because they could not demonstrate any societal harm resulting from interracial marriage. And that is why the bigots lost in
Loving v. Virginia.
PHP:
Just so with your irrational hatred of gays. You cannot show any societal harm by allowing two men to file a married tax return, or a gay woman receiving Social Security death benefits when her wife dies.
Lol, my hatred of gays? That's rich. You don't know me, you don't know a damn thing about me, I never posted one word saying I hate gays, but you automatically judge me as hating gays. I can see you're just one more bigoted, prejudiced, intolerant jackass. I don't need to show any societal harm to society to know that their is no such thing as a gay marriage. I have no problems with gay unions allowing the same tax benefits as married couples, but two people of the same gender living together as a couple is not a marriage. Please don't confuse my grasp of reality with hatred
PHP:
Saying something is a "sin" does not mean you are being rational. Some people believe dancing is a sin. Your opposition to homosexuality is on that level.
The gay community's [I]Loving v. Virginia [/I]is coming.
. Being rational? Saying two lesbians or two sodomites shackig up together is a marriage does not mean you are being rational either slick. As for the homos. Loving vs Virginia, though gay marraige may become the law of the land someday, it's not in the same category as Loving vs Virginia because that WAS a civil rights issue based on denying some men and woman equal protection under the law, while that is not the case with homosexual marriage, as homosexuals right now share the same exact rights all other citizens have. Gay men have the same rights as straight men, and gay woman have the same rights as straight woman. If it ever becomes the law of the land, it will based on the redifintion of the word marriage, and not on any denial of rights and it will be enacted by the same types of judges that decided the right to slaughter a baby in the womb is some how tied to a woman's right to privacy. In other words, ignorant, politically motivated activist judges who base their decsions on their own immoralities, poltiical views and party affiliations and not on any real reading of the Constitution or the intents of the Founders.
.
