Ted Cruz Says SCOTUS 'Clearly Wrong' to Legalize Gay Marriage

[HeyNorm]

So, how about older people past their childbearing years? They can't get married?

Sure they could as long as they belong to the demographic group Male/Female. We sure don’t want to discriminate. And I may add, a gay older couple could marry as well, as long as they are 1 man and 1 woman.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So, everyone eligible for same sex marriage is gay?????

DAYAM FOLKS!

Jesus fucking Christ!! Are you really so STUPID that you think that is what I said? I guess so.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Sure they could as long as they belong to the demographic group Male/Female. We sure don’t want to discriminate. And I may add, a gay older couple could marry as well, as long as they are 1 man and 1 woman.

Still trying to claw your way out of that hole that youg I see. You are a pathetic mess....and a BIGOT

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Yeah, throwing shit against the wall like, procreation is not a requirement to marry?

We talked about that numerous times, and yet you harp on it constantly.

Oh, Now you say that procreation is NOT a requirement to marry? But you say that gays should not be able to marry because they can't procreate? WHAT THE FUCK!!??

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You mean same sex marriage, right. Common mistake.

You are a common nuisance

 

[HeyNorm]

Jesus fucking Christ!! Are you really so STUPID that you think that is what I said? I guess so.

That is why I think your a bigot.

 

[HeyNorm]

Oh, Now you say that procreation is NOT a requirement to marry? But you say that gays should not be able to marry because they can't procreate? WHAT THE FUCK!!??

You’re leaning.

 

[HeyNorm]

Still trying to claw your way out of that hole that youg I see. You are a pathetic mess....and a BIGOT

I’ve included each and every group! Even the elderly and disabled!

You, and this “gay marriage” thingy excludes 97% of the population! And I’m the bigot?

 

[JoeB131]

Why would I ever think that two straight men getting married is icky? Yet I oppose SSM regardless

Do you think all those people who would never consider marriage to someone of the same sex are also bigots?

Yes, I think that anyone who is worked up over this is a bigot. I'd never want to marry another dude because I like women. But I'd never deny two men who love each other the right to get married.

Hey Joe, you seem a bit confused.

Can you explain your proclamation that I’m a bigot?

I’ve not discriminated against anyone with my opinion that marriage should be between 1 man and 1 woman.

except for those who are attracted to the same sex.

You, sir, are a bigot. Because you haven't really justified your position in anything other than your own disdain for gay people.

 

[JoeB131]

Because the argument that excluding same sex couples from the institution of marriage is discriminatory is a baseless argument.

Remember, the additional rights afforded under obergfell is to “same sex couples” not just gay couples. Marriage law has never excluded any sexuality from the right to Marry, as long as they marry someone of the opposite sex.

The opponents of my view will say I am excluding gays from the right to marry someone of the same sex, which is true, but it also excludes straights from it as well.

Wow. Let's see your logic here. You want to exclude sexuality from marriage. So it's okay for a couple who have never had sex to get married, to let's say, get someone a green card, but two gay people in a committed loving relationship shouldn't be able to get married because they are of the same sex.

Is this what you are going with here?

The fact is, love and sex are implied in marriage. It's why the ICE insists that you be able to prove that there's a real relationship before they will issue a green card for an immigrant seeking to marry a citizen. It's why a lack of consummation of a marriage is grounds for legal annulment.

So just admit, that you think that two men having sex is icky. (Ever notice that homophobes only talk about men having sex, and never women? Hmmm)

 

[HeyNorm]

Yes, I think that anyone who is worked up over this is a bigot. I'd never want to marry another dude because I like women. But I'd never deny two men who love each other the right to get married.



except for those who are attracted to the same sex.

You, sir, are a bigot. Because you haven't really justified your position in anything other than your own disdain for gay people.

But I have no distain for gay people. No more than straight people who want to involve themselves in an institution that has served an incredibly important purpose for centuries.

 

[HeyNorm]

Wow. Let's see your logic here. You want to exclude sexuality from marriage. So it's okay for a couple who have never had sex to get married, to let's say, get someone a green card, but two gay people in a committed loving relationship shouldn't be able to get married because they are of the same sex.

Is this what you are going with here?

The fact is, love and sex are implied in marriage. It's why the ICE insists that you be able to prove that there's a real relationship before they will issue a green card for an immigrant seeking to marry a citizen. It's why a lack of consummation of a marriage is grounds for legal annulment.

So just admit, that you think that two men having sex is icky. (Ever notice that homophobes only talk about men having sex, and never women? Hmmm)

Joe, I’ve never mentioned men having sex. You just did. Are you a homophobe?

 

[HeyNorm]

Wow. Let's see your logic here. You want to exclude sexuality from marriage. So it's okay for a couple who have never had sex to get married, to let's say, get someone a green card, but two gay people in a committed loving relationship shouldn't be able to get married because they are of the same sex.

Is this what you are going with here?

The fact is, love and sex are implied in marriage. It's why the ICE insists that you be able to prove that there's a real relationship before they will issue a green card for an immigrant seeking to marry a citizen. It's why a lack of consummation of a marriage is grounds for legal annulment.

So just admit, that you think that two men having sex is icky. (Ever notice that homophobes only talk about men having sex, and never women? Hmmm)

Ohhhh, now you want to argue something is valid because “it is implied”.

Well Joe, nothing is more of an implication that procreation is an important part to marriage then only allowing marriage between a man and a woman.

Thanks for the assist Joe!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I’ve included each and every group! Even the elderly and disabled!

You, and this “gay marriage” thingy excludes 97% of the population! And I’m the bigot?

Oh my fucking god! What? I am excluding people from what? How. I still can't decide if you are insane or just stupid. Most likely somewhere in between a sociopath playing a sick game.

In any case, I have noticed that you do not respond to anything like a normal human being . No matter how thoroughly excoriated you have not actual emotional reaction. Not only do you not react on an emotional level but there seems to be something missing on an intellectual/cognitive level as well. You never actually present a counter argument. Rather, you throw out some new and bizarre crap in order to deflect and distract from whatever was said . It is like your are some sort of zombie troll bot who does not know he is dead. The fact is that you are dead and I will not let you eat my brains

 

[HeyNorm]

Oh my fucking god! What? I am excluding people from what? How. I still can't decide if you are insane or just stupid. Most likely somewhere in between a sociopath playing a sick game.

In any case, I have noticed that you do not respond to anything like a normal human being . No matter how thoroughly excoriated you have not actual emotional reaction. Not only do you not react on an emotional level but there seems to be something missing on an intellectual/cognitive level as well. You never actually present a counter argument. Rather, you throw out some new and bizarre crap in order to deflect and distract from whatever was said . It is like your are some sort of zombie troll bot who does not know he is dead. The fact is that you are dead and I will not let you eat my brains

Now let’s get back to the discussion about how you think that just because we don’t force women to give birth, you think a same sex couple is similar to an opposite sex couple.

 

[JoeB131]

But I have no distain for gay people. No more than straight people who want to involve themselves in an institution that has served an incredibly important purpose for centuries.

For most of those centuries, the woman was considered a piece of property. Did you know that marital rape wasn't illegal in this country until 1978? Yup, it was understood that if you were married, you could not be raped by your husband. He had a right to sex on demand!

Up until 1967, in many parts of the country, it would be illegal for me to marry my Asian girlfriend.

We redefine marriage all the time.

Ohhhh, now you want to argue something is valid because “it is implied”.

Well Joe, nothing is more of an implication that procreation is an important part to marriage then only allowing marriage between a man and a woman.

35% of children are born out of wedlock today. People figured out you don't need to get married to have a kid! Of course, gay people have kids, too, thanks to surrogacy and in-vitro fertilization.

 

[HeyNorm]

For most of those centuries, the woman was considered a piece of property. Did you know that marital rape wasn't illegal in this country until 1978? Yup, it was understood that if you were married, you could not be raped by your husband. He had a right to sex on demand!

Up until 1967, in many parts of the country, it would be illegal for me to marry my Asian girlfriend.

We redefine marriage all the time.



35% of children are born out of wedlock today. People figured out you don't need to get married to have a kid! Of course, gay people have kids, too, thanks to surrogacy and in-vitro fertilization.

What any of this has to do with our discussion is beyond me.

As we both know, the discovery that people can have children outside of wedlock is nothing new Joe, and has nothing to do with marriage being the Union between a man and a woman.

Now let’s discuss this assertion that marriage had nothing to do with procreation, when as you asserted earlier, the mere implication is enough to create validity.

And, how your side believes that women should be forced to give birth should obergfell get overturned.

 

[JoeB131]

Okay, now your homophobic ass is getting into weird territory..

What any of this has to do with our discussion is beyond me.

As we both know, the discovery that people can have children outside of wedlock is nothing new Joe, and has nothing to do with marriage being the Union between a man and a woman.

Yes, they can. I'll go one further, 50% of marriages end in divorce, which is often rough on the kids. So this notion that marriage is this sacred beast that is there for the creation of families, and we can't let it be sullied by icky, icky gay people is just a tad silly.

Now let’s discuss this assertion that marriage had nothing to do with procreation, when as you asserted earlier, the mere implication is enough to create validity.

No, it has to do with two people wanting to make a commitment to each other. The 50% divorce rate notwithstanding, gay people have a right to make a commitment to the people they love just like straight people.

And, how your side believes that women should be forced to give birth should obergfell get overturned.

No, your side is trying to do that by overturning Roe.

 

[HeyNorm]

Sacred is a religious term Joe. One I’ve not used.

Now for icky sex. I’ve not brought up gay sex as either icky or pleasant. The only one that has brought up that subject is you.

What I have brought up is the fact that gay sex had never resulted in the creation of a separate human life. Straight sex has Joe. Get it yet. One is essential to our species, the other?

Not so much.

So, since we are on the subject of icky. All gay individuals had, since the beginning of time, the availability to marry, even though they thought the sex within a marriage was “icky”.

So explain to the world what kind of phobia it is that gays have against straights?

And since you claim I’m homophobic because I oppose all same sex marriage…….

Fun Fact: I oppose same sex marriage regardless of the sexuality of the partners.

Your claim that the opposition to same sex marriage makes me homophobic is therefore baseless.

Try having an open mind Joe.

 

[JoeB131]

What I have brought up is the fact that gay sex had never resulted in the creation of a separate human life. Straight sex has Joe. Get it yet. One is essential to our species, the other?

Except gays can have kids through in-vitro fertilization or adoption or hiring surrogates.

So explain to the world what kind of phobia it is that gays have against straights?

The fear of being murdered by a bigot like you like Matt Shephard was?