The "Free Press" has a Narrative that Assumes Gays are being Denied a Right...

[mal]

The fallacy is in believing that homosexuals are Denying their Natural Design. Their Natural Design is to be gay; it's not some fucked up choice they made because they want to be different.

That is idiotic to say the least.

If a woman was born to be a lesbian.

Then by Natural Design she wouldn't be born with a womb or uterus.

Or a Natural Design gay man would be born without nuts or a prostate.

See how stupid your "Natural Design" theory is??

Like Obama's Opinion on Gay Marriage, Homosexuals are Evolving...

Soon they will either not be able to ProCreate with the Opposite Sex Naturally, or they WILL Evolve into a ProCreative Species that Creates Life with their Same Sex.

You Hateful ****!



peace...

 

[mal]

Government should not be involved in marriage,they should not condone or condemn marriage.

That's one Opinion... But I would Assume that you are an Advocate for Gay Marriage.

If I cared, I'd go and find the Posts that Support it.

I don't.



peace...

I'm just saying government should't be condoning or condemning any marriage.

For the 3rd or 4th time... That's great. When you die, they still will.

The Debate is rooted in what is, not what you Wish was.



peace...

 

[Truthseeker420]

So marriage should be abolished in?

government should have no role in marriage....

They do and will... Your point is Clear and it's an Opinion that will not find it's way into Substance for Generations if ever.

Anything else to add to the Discussion?



peace...

well... if I can lay the foundation to stop it I will be happy.

 

[Sunni Man]

Like Obama's Opinion on Gay Marriage, Homosexuals are Evolving...

Soon they will either not be able to ProCreate with the Opposite Sex Naturally, or they WILL Evolve into a ProCreative Species that Creates Life with their Same Sex.

Good, then they will evolve themselves into extinction.

 

[mal]

Post #2... I Support Civil Unions. All of the Legal, Death and Health Issues for Gay Couples can be dealt with "Equally" in Law without calling the Coupling Equal to what Created them and what will Create Life in the Future.

NC is Wrong and the Supreme Court would Likely Strike their Law down. Civil Unions are Constitutional...

And the Answer.

^What I just sent to A15... Because it can't be said enough.



peace...

 

[Artevelde]

Government should not be involved in marriage,they should not condone or condemn marriage.

So marriage should be abolished in?

government should have no role in marriage....

In that case you have to abolish marriage in civil law and return to the time when it was purely a religious sacrament. I don't favour that personally, but it would be intellectually defendable.

 

[snjmom]

Who needs to be married to procreate? Marriage isn't about procreation, it's about property rights. Ask any bastard.

 

[Artevelde]

News from The Associated Press

^It's Obvious in the Assumption in most "Reporting" that Marriage is a "Right" being Denied Same Sex Couples.

Of course when the Supreme Court has Ruled on Marriage Rights, they have made it Abundandly Clear why it's a Right:

Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.

Loving v. Virginia

Only Procreation is "fundamental to our very existence and survival"...

Coupling is not... Regardless of what that Coupling is.

The Left that Infects the "Free Press" may believe that Homosexuals are being Denied a Right, but there is no such Basis in Law to Support that Narrative.

In Fact, the SCOTUS has made it clear what the Right is.

Homosexuals Denying their Natural Design and Equipment is a Choice they make that Society is not Required to Validate as Equal to that which Creates us.

Doesn't make it bad, wrong or Criminal, but it certainly isn't Equal Naturally.

Fact not Fiction.



peace...

The fallacy is in believing that homosexuals are Denying their Natural Design. Their Natural Design is to be gay; it's not some fucked up choice they made because they want to be different.

Not to mention that the SCOTUS ruling was misinterpreted by the OP. They did not say procreation was a fundamental right, they said marriage was....you don't need to be married to reproduce but being married benefits all parties involved.

So yeah, gays are being denied a fundamental right.

Plain nonsense.

 

[mal]

Like Obama's Opinion on Gay Marriage, Homosexuals are Evolving...

Soon they will either not be able to ProCreate with the Opposite Sex Naturally, or they WILL Evolve into a ProCreative Species that Creates Life with their Same Sex.

Good, then they will evolve themselves into extinction.

Obviously they are Dependent on those who do not Deny their Natural Design and Equipment...

Hell, their VERY EXISTENCE is a Reflection of Natural Marriage.

Those who are Demanding "Marriage" over Civil Unions aren't about anything more than Finding Validation for what they are doing.

Being called Equal doesn't make you Equal... In Law or otherwise.

As a Person, ALL Homosexuals are Equal... When it comes to our Natural Design, their Defiance is what changes that in Marriage.

They are not being denied Marriage... They are being Denied the Ability to Redefine Marriage as something it Naturally is not.



peace...

 

[Article 15]

So it's said... I Support Civil Unions and the Right for Adults to do whatever the **** they want in the Privacy of their own Homes or Bath Houses.



peace...

Sorry, I missed this.

So you agree that homosexual couples should be allowed to enter into civil unions and be afforded the same benefits under the law a married couple receives.

I agree as well.

I don't think that Churches should be forced to perform or recognize these unions if they choose not to. If they don't want to that's their gig.

 

[mal]

News from The Associated Press

^It's Obvious in the Assumption in most "Reporting" that Marriage is a "Right" being Denied Same Sex Couples.

Of course when the Supreme Court has Ruled on Marriage Rights, they have made it Abundandly Clear why it's a Right:

Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.

Loving v. Virginia

Only Procreation is "fundamental to our very existence and survival"...

Coupling is not... Regardless of what that Coupling is.

The Left that Infects the "Free Press" may believe that Homosexuals are being Denied a Right, but there is no such Basis in Law to Support that Narrative.

In Fact, the SCOTUS has made it clear what the Right is.

Homosexuals Denying their Natural Design and Equipment is a Choice they make that Society is not Required to Validate as Equal to that which Creates us.

Doesn't make it bad, wrong or Criminal, but it certainly isn't Equal Naturally.

Fact not Fiction.



peace...

The fallacy is in believing that homosexuals are Denying their Natural Design. Their Natural Design is to be gay; it's not some fucked up choice they made because they want to be different.

Not to mention that the SCOTUS ruling was misinterpreted by the OP. They did not say procreation was a fundamental right, they said marriage was....you don't need to be married to reproduce but being married benefits all parties involved.

So yeah, gays are being denied a fundamental right.

"Fundamental to our VERY EXISTENCE and SURVIVAL..."

How is Same Sex Coupling that?...

And Loving was the **** about ProCreating and Mixing Blood.

Read it.

Ravi you are one of the most Dishonest Internet Trolls on the Web.



peace...

 

[Truthseeker420]

So marriage should be abolished in?

government should have no role in marriage....

In that case you have to abolish marriage in civil law and return to the time when it was purely a religious sacrament. I don't favour that personally, but it would be intellectually defendable.

Yes, marriage should be between you and your God. You should get no benefits or penalties from the government fro being married.IMO

 

[G.T.]

The Supreme Court is wrong, Marriage is not fundamental to our survival.

 

[Artevelde]

government should have no role in marriage....

In that case you have to abolish marriage in civil law and return to the time when it was purely a religious sacrament. I don't favour that personally, but it would be intellectually defendable.

Yes, marriage should be between you and your God. You should get no benefits or penalties from the government fro being married.IMO

I don't share your preference for this approach, but it is consistent and defendable. I also think you will not find a large following for abolishing marriage in civil law.

 

[mal]

So it's said... I Support Civil Unions and the Right for Adults to do whatever the **** they want in the Privacy of their own Homes or Bath Houses.



peace...

Sorry, I missed this.

So you agree that homosexual couples should be allowed to enter into civil unions and be afforded the same benefits under the law a married couple receives.

I agree as well.

I don't think that Churches should be forced to perform or recognize these unions if they choose not to. If they don't want to that's their gig.

Thanks to Shitstains like Bodecea and others, the Fact that I have ALWAYS Supported Civil Unions and was Active in getting rid of Texas Sodomy Laws with some people here in Denver that I Care about, is lost on their Lies.

I don't Support Marriage being Expanded outside of what it is Naturally, and I don't agree with Exposing Young Children in Public Schools to Adult Sexual Deviations...

ANY of them... Hetero or Homo.

Other than that...



peace...

 

[mal]

The Supreme Court is wrong, Marriage is not fundamental to our survival.

^I Respect that take... ravi's Denial of what the Court said is Disgusting.

Good on you GT...

And you are Wrong.



peace...

 

[G.T.]

I can't be wrong, because you've presented no logical deduction of how I could be except that "someone else said so."

Here's my logic:

single sex makes babies
married sex makes babies

common denominator? Sex. Marriage is irrelevant to our species reproducing. Now let's see the converse logic.

 

[Truthseeker420]

In that case you have to abolish marriage in civil law and return to the time when it was purely a religious sacrament. I don't favour that personally, but it would be intellectually defendable.

Yes, marriage should be between you and your God. You should get no benefits or penalties from the government fro being married.IMO

I don't share your preference for this approach, but it is consistent and defendable. I also think you will not find a large following for abolishing marriage in civil law.

I agree...it is so ingrained in our culture.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The fallacy is in believing that homosexuals are Denying their Natural Design. Their Natural Design is to be gay; it's not some fucked up choice they made because they want to be different.

That is idiotic to say the least.

If a woman was born to be a lesbian.

Then by Natural Design she wouldn't be born with a womb or uterus.

Or a Natural Design gay man would be born without nuts or a prostate.

See how stupid your "Natural Design" theory is??

Natural Design is irrelevant. If the ability to reproduce were a fundamental requirement of marriage then we would deny marriage to sterilized individuals, women past menopause, etc.

Since we do no such thing, any argument associated with reproduction is totally without merit.

 

[Artevelde]

Yes, marriage should be between you and your God. You should get no benefits or penalties from the government fro being married.IMO

I don't share your preference for this approach, but it is consistent and defendable. I also think you will not find a large following for abolishing marriage in civil law.

I agree...it is so ingrained in our culture.

Indeed. It is a cornerstone of society. That's why I prefer not to mess with it.