The Homosexual Dilemma

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

But even if the marriage equality crowd were not winning the popular opinion as it is, Jacksonian democratic majority does not govern civil rights.

The rest of America will not be governed by a hateful narrow-minded small minority from the far right.

Sorry. You don't get to make up rights because people aren't voting for your agenda. The fact you have to push your agenda on everyone through black robed tyrants says that you admit you're imposing your morality on Americans under the guise of "civil rights".

And isn't it you Leftwats who are always telling us not to impose our beliefs on others?

So like I said on the OP, on behalf of the American People, the U.S. Constitution, and all decency.....

**** you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Quit being a twit, twit. No one is making you marry someone of your own sex. No one is making your churches marry folks they don't want to.

You are trying to limit everyone us, and that has come to AN END.

The popularity opinion, which is in our corner, does not make it legal. SCOTUS interpretation of the Constitution does.

A small minority like you will not make us live your form of Christian heresy.

 

[GreenBean]

Uh oh...somebody sounds jealous. Intellectual curiosity, right?

Nope, but its funny that 98% of the supporters of gay marriage are gay. Jealous???? not hardly. sympathetic to sick people? yes.

You've made some ridiculous statements, but that's gotta be in the top 5.

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55

The key to that poll lies in its opening statement ...

support for the law recognizing same-sex marriages as legally valid

Which simply means they recognize the validity - had I myself been polled I would have polled in favor of its legal validity - that doesn't mean they recognize its sanity - in addition the article title ....

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%

cites a two year climb from 53 - 55% - anybody who knows anything about statistics and polling is well aware that 2% is statistically insignificant

In addition , even f it were significant - which it is not - any experiment or observation that involves drawing a sample from a population, there is always the possibility that an observed effect would have occurred due to sampling error alone

Actually- anyone who knows statistics knows that you can't claim that that 2% is insignificant without looking at the statistics involved.

Gallup tells us the statistical margin of erro
For results based on this sample of national
adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.

So roughly speaking that range would be between 51% and 59% approval.

People like yourself tend to ignore statistics they don't like, claim statistics say something that they don't and then crow about statistics that they do like.

Right now support for 'gay marriage' is roughly where support was for mixed race marriages in about 1996.

And we know how that trend has continued.

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they can hardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution.

Proposition 8

As an example how low down, devious and isgusting these LGBT dirt bags are in reality - one need look mo further than Prop. 8 in California.

Following it's passage of the proposition by the California electorate, the gay mafia obtained donation lists of all who had supported it by contributing to the "Yes on 8" campaign, they published the list, organized an activism group, and began organizing boycotts of the supporters and their employers.

The harassment continues to this day, one its most recent victims was Brendan Eich former CEO of Mozilla who made a small donation to a group that supported banning Gay Marriage in California. The Gay Mafia and its foot soldiers latched onto this fact and attacked his company forcing him to resign in 2014. An earlier victim of this vicious and malicious harassment was aimed at Scott Eckern.

Eckern was the artistic director of the nonprofit California Musical Theatre, he too like Eich, was forced to resign after the Yes vote on Proposition 8 donation list revealed a $1,000 contribution he had made.


Nowhere was the wrath of the gods of gaydom felt more than in the entertainment Industry. Anybody from that pitiful sector who became associated with opposition to the Gay Community was targeted.

One such victim was Richard Raddon who was the director of the Los Angeles Film Festival, he was forced to resign in November 2008 after it was disclosed that he donated $1,500 towards Proposition 8.

Alan Stock, CEO of Cinemark Theaters contributed $9,999 to the Yes on Prop. 8 campaign. The Sundance Film Festival, based in Utah became the target of calls for boycotts because they used theaters owned and operated by Stocks company.

Even employees of HOme Depot and ACe hardware working for peanuts found themselves harassed to no end by these vicious queers the "Ducky Boys"


Hollywood Gay Mafia

 

[GreenBean]

But even if the marriage equality crowd were not winning the popular opinion as it is, Jacksonian democratic majority does not govern civil rights.

The rest of America will not be governed by a hateful narrow-minded small minority from the far right.

Sorry. You don't get to make up rights because people aren't voting for your agenda. The fact you have to push your agenda on everyone through black robed tyrants says that you admit you're imposing your morality on Americans under the guise of "civil rights".

And isn't it you Leftwats who are always telling us not to impose our beliefs on others?

So like I said on the OP, on behalf of the American People, the U.S. Constitution, and all decency.....

**** you.

St.Mike - I dunno if you're role playing or not ... if U R ... I like your style - good schtick - if not I still like your style

 

[GreenBean]

The homosexual dilemma...

Sterilization?

Lobotomy?

Chemical castration?

Spay and neuter?

Shock treatments?

Psychiatric commitment?

Exile to Queer Island?

Disinfectant by the 55-gallon drum -full?

So many choices... so little time.

What a dilemma !!!

AS MUCH AS i WOULD LIKE TO BE THE ONE ADMINISTERING THE SHOCK TREATMENT - ALAS -It doesn't work ...lmao... but Conversion therapy aka reparative therapy is the choice of a kinder gentler nation.

 

[JakeStarkey]

stmike is being complimented by a guy I ran into ignore becau I caught him out lying. Careful, stmike, GreenBeanSnow knows nothing.

 

[Syriusly]

Uh oh...somebody sounds jealous. Intellectual curiosity, right?

Nope, but its funny that 98% of the supporters of gay marriage are gay. Jealous???? not hardly. sympathetic to sick people? yes.

You've made some ridiculous statements, but that's gotta be in the top 5.

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55

The key to that poll lies in its opening statement ...

support for the law recognizing same-sex marriages as legally valid

Which simply means they recognize the validity - had I myself been polled I would have polled in favor of its legal validity - that doesn't mean they recognize its sanity - in addition the article title ....

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%

cites a two year climb from 53 - 55% - anybody who knows anything about statistics and polling is well aware that 2% is statistically insignificant

In addition , even f it were significant - which it is not - any experiment or observation that involves drawing a sample from a population, there is always the possibility that an observed effect would have occurred due to sampling error alone

Actually- anyone who knows statistics knows that you can't claim that that 2% is insignificant without looking at the statistics involved.

Gallup tells us the statistical margin of erro
For results based on this sample of national
adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.

So roughly speaking that range would be between 51% and 59% approval.

People like yourself tend to ignore statistics they don't like, claim statistics say something that they don't and then crow about statistics that they do like.

Right now support for 'gay marriage' is roughly where support was for mixed race marriages in about 1996.

And we know how that trend has continued.

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they can hardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

When did Alabama voters decide it was time to eliminate Alabama law against mixed race marriages? 2002- and it won by a whopping 59% of the vote.....meaning 41% of Alabama voters didn't think the law should be repealed.

What you are upset about is that there is a sea change in attitudes towards homosexuals and marriage in the United States- and you are more and more in the position of the Alabama voters who still reject mixed race marriages.

In 2012, Washington voters voted 54% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maine voters voted 52% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maryland voters voted 52% to 48% to legalize same gender marriage.

What were the others results in 2012?
Minnsesota voters voted down a ban on gay marriages- 53% to 47%

North Carolina was the only state that was able to get a majority of voters to vote against gay marriage in 2012.

No one believes that Prop 8 would pass in California today, no matter how much money the LDS poured into the State.

The times they are a changing.

And those who oppose marriage equality for homosexual couples are being left behind like the couples that opposed marriage equality for mixed race couples.

 

[Syriusly]

The homosexual dilemma...

Sterilization?

Lobotomy?

Chemical castration?

Spay and neuter?

Shock treatments?

Psychiatric commitment?

Exile to Queer Island?

Disinfectant by the 55-gallon drum -full?

So many choices... so little time.

What a dilemma !!!

AS MUCH AS i WOULD LIKE TO BE THE ONE ADMINISTERING THE SHOCK TREATMENT - ALAS -It doesn't work ...lmao... but Conversion therapy aka reparative therapy is the choice of a kinder gentler nation.

I still continue to be surprised that there are bigots who want to torture and '***** smack' Americans- simply because they can't tell the difference between serial killers and homosexuals.

 

[Syriusly]

Nope, but its funny that 98% of the supporters of gay marriage are gay. Jealous???? not hardly. sympathetic to sick people? yes.

You've made some ridiculous statements, but that's gotta be in the top 5.

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55

The key to that poll lies in its opening statement ...

support for the law recognizing same-sex marriages as legally valid

Which simply means they recognize the validity - had I myself been polled I would have polled in favor of its legal validity - that doesn't mean they recognize its sanity - in addition the article title ....

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%

cites a two year climb from 53 - 55% - anybody who knows anything about statistics and polling is well aware that 2% is statistically insignificant

In addition , even f it were significant - which it is not - any experiment or observation that involves drawing a sample from a population, there is always the possibility that an observed effect would have occurred due to sampling error alone

Actually- anyone who knows statistics knows that you can't claim that that 2% is insignificant without looking at the statistics involved.

Gallup tells us the statistical margin of erro
For results based on this sample of national
adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.

So roughly speaking that range would be between 51% and 59% approval.

People like yourself tend to ignore statistics they don't like, claim statistics say something that they don't and then crow about statistics that they do like.

Right now support for 'gay marriage' is roughly where support was for mixed race marriages in about 1996.

And we know how that trend has continued.

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they can hardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution.

Proposition 8

As an example how low down, devious and isgusting these LGBT dirt bags are in reality - one need look mo further than Prop. 8 in California.

Following it's passage of the proposition by the California electorate, the gay mafia obtained donation lists

Gay mafia.....lol......driving around in their pink cadillacs and their rainbow tommy guns.

Bigots are scared of the silliest things.

 

[Syriusly]

But even if the marriage equality crowd were not winning the popular opinion as it is, Jacksonian democratic majority does not govern civil rights.

The rest of America will not be governed by a hateful narrow-minded small minority from the far right.

Sorry. You don't get to make up rights because people aren't voting for your agenda. The fact you have to push your agenda on everyone through black robed tyrants says that you.

The fact that you consider judges to be 'black robed tyrants' just is one more example of how much you despise our Constitution.

 

[Syriusly]

Yup, got nothing at all. SCOTUS will rule this year in favor of marriage equality and not even consider your arguments. Tough to be you, little buddy.

I'm guessing that your idea of SCOTUS ruling for "marriage equality" means striking down any law by which a state defines what marriage is. .

The Supreme Court has struck down State marriage laws as unconstitutional at least 3 times previously- were your panties in a wad then too?

Americans have the right to marriage- States can impose restrictions on rights- and just like prohibiting ex-felons from owning guns, states can restrict marriage, but just like restricting gun ownership- states must be able to demonstrate a compelling state interest that is achieved by denying those rights.

Simply saying that the States want to discriminate against homosexuals because it would make bigots happy is not a compelling state interest.

 

[Seawytch]

I am sorry, I just don't see homosexuals as a discreet group that NEEDS any more protections than are already guaranteed by the constitution to all of us, anyway. And YES, given that, people should be given leeway to accept or reject people on sexual preference, because choice transcends petty sexual matters, and THAT should be the capitol issue. In my humble opinion, anyway...

And I'm not sorry that gays and lesbians fighting for and attaining rights and protections equal to heterosexuals causes consternation to bigots and homophobes.

 

[Seawytch]

And again, you school us about NAMBLA.

Or I utilize logic and assume they will go with proven legal strategies.

BTW, would love a response to my previous post to you.

The one about bigamy, et al? What is it about gay marriage that makes such things valid that we don't see in straight marriage?

No, the one where I told you a little about me. After you read it, you'll never take me seriously again.

You're making an assumption that we took you seriously in the first place.

So you didn't read it. That's disappointing.

I read it. It was meaningless. Racists always claim to have a black best friend. If you wish to deny gays and lesbians equal access to civil marriage, you're an anti gay bigot regardless of your motivation.

 

[Seawytch]

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they can hardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

You're just providing an excellent example of why we don't vote on people's civil rights. Loving v Virginia was in 1967.

 

[Redfish]

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they can hardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

You're just providing an excellent example of why we don't vote on people's civil rights. Loving v Virginia was in 1967.

no matter how many times you say it, race and sexual orientation are not the same.

but since you brought up race, are the following races: hispanic, asian, arab, latino ? Answer: No.

second question: would you support an affirmative action law for gays?

just trying to see where you really are on this.

 

[Redfish]

I am sorry, I just don't see homosexuals as a discreet group that NEEDS any more protections than are already guaranteed by the constitution to all of us, anyway. And YES, given that, people should be given leeway to accept or reject people on sexual preference, because choice transcends petty sexual matters, and THAT should be the capitol issue. In my humble opinion, anyway...

And I'm not sorry that gays and lesbians fighting for and attaining rights and protections equal to heterosexuals causes consternation to bigots and homophobes.

my wife had an aunt who was a lesbian, she outgrew it. what will happen to your "marriage" when you or you partner outgrow it?

 

[Kondor3]

I am sorry, I just don't see homosexuals as a discreet group that NEEDS any more protections than are already guaranteed by the constitution to all of us, anyway. And YES, given that, people should be given leeway to accept or reject people on sexual preference, because choice transcends petty sexual matters, and THAT should be the capitol issue. In my humble opinion, anyway...

And I'm not sorry that gays and lesbians fighting for and attaining rights and protections equal to heterosexuals causes consternation to bigots and homophobes.

my wife had an aunt who was a lesbian, she outgrew it. what will happen to your "marriage" when you or you partner outgrow it?

True.

Rather like a foolish cow thinking she is a bull, and trying to hump another cow.

Eventually, even a dumb cow figures it out.

 

[GreenBean]

Nope, but its funny that 98% of the supporters of gay marriage are gay. Jealous???? not hardly. sympathetic to sick people? yes.

You've made some ridiculous statements, but that's gotta be in the top 5.

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55

The key to that poll lies in its opening statement ...

support for the law recognizing same-sex marriages as legally valid

Which simply means they recognize the validity - had I myself been polled I would have polled in favor of its legal validity - that doesn't mean they recognize its sanity - in addition the article title ....

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%

cites a two year climb from 53 - 55% - anybody who knows anything about statistics and polling is well aware that 2% is statistically insignificant

In addition , even f it were significant - which it is not - any experiment or observation that involves drawing a sample from a population, there is always the possibility that an observed effect would have occurred due to sampling error alone

Actually- anyone who knows statistics knows that you can't claim that that 2% is insignificant without looking at the statistics involved.

Gallup tells us the statistical margin of erro
For results based on this sample of national
adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.

So roughly speaking that range would be between 51% and 59% approval.

People like yourself tend to ignore statistics they don't like, claim statistics say something that they don't and then crow about statistics that they do like.

Right now support for 'gay marriage' is roughly where support was for mixed race marriages in about 1996.

And we know how that trend has continued.

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they canhardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

When did Alabama voters decide it was time to eliminate Alabama law against mixed race marriages? 2002- and it won by a whopping 59% of the vote.....meaning 41% of Alabama voters didn't think the law should be repealed.

What you are upset about is that there is a sea change in attitudes towards homosexuals and marriage in the United States- and you are more and more in the position of the Alabama voters who still reject mixed race marriages.

In 2012, Washington voters voted 54% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maine voters voted 52% to 46% to legalize same gender marriage.
Also in 2012, Maryland voters voted 52% to 48% to legalize same gender marriage.

What were the others results in 2012?
Minnsesota voters voted down a ban on gay marriages- 53% to 47%

North Carolina was the only state that was able to get a majority of voters to vote against gay marriage in 2012.

No one believes that Prop 8 would pass in California today, no matter how much money the LDS poured into the State.

The times they are a changing.

And those who oppose marriage equality for homosexual couples are being left behind like the couples that opposed marriage equality for mixed race couples.

Pathetic queer Imbeciles trying to steal the wind from the sails of Civil Rights - Hey ****** - Sexual Dementia and societal perversion are not a Civil Right - douche bag.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Or I utilize logic and assume they will go with proven legal strategies.

BTW, would love a response to my previous post to you.

The one about bigamy, et al? What is it about gay marriage that makes such things valid that we don't see in straight marriage?

No, the one where I told you a little about me. After you read it, you'll never take me seriously again.

You're making an assumption that we took you seriously in the first place.

So you didn't read it. That's disappointing.

I read it. It was meaningless. Racists always claim to have a black best friend. If you wish to deny gays and lesbians equal access to civil marriage, you're an anti gay bigot regardless of your motivation.

Got it. Then what you say about your personal life will be as meaningless to me too, and as mendacious too. Perhaps you made up the kids you have, perhaps your whole world is just a fantasy. I truly threw pearls before swine with you.

My personal policy is to believe everything people say about themselves on the net unless there's strong evidence to reject it. Because this is the internet, people can tell the truth or they can lie and there's really no way to confirm either way, so out of virtue, I presume the best about people; a virtue you clearly lack.

I'm sorry I shared all that with you, you clearly proved yourself to be a troll.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

It's hard to believe those numbers when California voters approved of a ban on gay marriage by popular referendum. When it was struck down in court, they passed another referendum adding a ban to gay marriage to the California constitution. Yeah, Blue State California. Compare this to New York who pulled some shady tricks to pass gay marriage in the middle of the night before any opposition could be mounted to it. And that was the legislature, not a popular movement, so they can hardly be seen as representing the people in doing that. When it comes to the laws that are backed by popular support, gay marriage is trumped by those who want to preserve what real marriage is.

You're just providing an excellent example of why we don't vote on people's civil rights. Loving v Virginia was in 1967.

Calling it a "civil right" over and over again doesn't make it so...unless you're silly enough to believe that repetition has the power to turn a lie into truth.