Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Hahaha! Laws for marriage apply equally across the board. One man, One woman. Clay fails again.
Hahaha! Laws for marriage apply equally across the board. One man, One woman. Clay fails again.
The two groups function differently. That is not true of other civil rights.
Male/Female couples have specific and unique functions that same sex couples do not, nor, and this is important, CAN.
Asking to be equal, when equality is impossible is silly.
The law could make races equal, it can't make same sex coupling equal to opposite sex coupling.
Justices are powerful, but even they can't defeat nature.
Sorry Clayton, you don't get to decide an argument is invalid just because it offends you. NEXT.....
The law has determined which arguments are valid and which ones aren't.
Clayton's positions are all in accordance with US law whereas your puerile ignorance might as well be orbiting a star in another galaxy.
Hahaha! Laws for marriage apply equally across the board. One man, One woman. Clay fails again.
The two groups function differently. That is not true of other civil rights.
Male/Female couples have specific and unique functions that same sex couples do not, nor, and this is important, CAN.
Asking to be equal, when equality is impossible is silly.
The law could make races equal, it can't make same sex coupling equal to opposite sex coupling.
Justices are powerful, but even they can't defeat nature.
The law doesn't discriminate on the basis of race or gender because neither is chosen by the individual.
The law also doesn't discriminate on the basis of religion and yet that is a matter of individual choice.
Since the law forbids discrimination based upon race and religion why must it discriminate based upon gender just to satisfy some religious homophobes who don't understand the law and what equality is all about?
Are you denying that religions are homophobic?The two groups function differently. That is not true of other civil rights.
Male/Female couples have specific and unique functions that same sex couples do not, nor, and this is important, CAN.
Asking to be equal, when equality is impossible is silly.
The law could make races equal, it can't make same sex coupling equal to opposite sex coupling.
Justices are powerful, but even they can't defeat nature.
The law doesn't discriminate on the basis of race or gender because neither is chosen by the individual.
The law also doesn't discriminate on the basis of religion and yet that is a matter of individual choice.
Since the law forbids discrimination based upon race and religion why must it discriminate based upon gender just to satisfy some religious homophobes who don't understand the law and what equality is all about?
Freedom of religion is written in the constitution itself. Go back and see where I have used religion as an argument. I know you want everyone who opposes you to do such, I find no need.
We discriminate every day based on disability or ability. Same sex couples do not function the same as opposite sex couples and it is silly to argue that they do.
Same sex couples function like roommates. Nothing more.
Are you denying that religions are homophobic?The law doesn't discriminate on the basis of race or gender because neither is chosen by the individual.
The law also doesn't discriminate on the basis of religion and yet that is a matter of individual choice.
Since the law forbids discrimination based upon race and religion why must it discriminate based upon gender just to satisfy some religious homophobes who don't understand the law and what equality is all about?
Freedom of religion is written in the constitution itself. Go back and see where I have used religion as an argument. I know you want everyone who opposes you to do such, I find no need.We discriminate every day based on disability or ability. Same sex couples do not function the same as opposite sex couples and it is silly to argue that they do.
Same sex couples function like roommates. Nothing more.
So do those who are infertile. Why are you not imposing a fertility requirement on marriage?
Are you denying that religions are homophobic?Freedom of religion is written in the constitution itself. Go back and see where I have used religion as an argument. I know you want everyone who opposes you to do such, I find no need.We discriminate every day based on disability or ability. Same sex couples do not function the same as opposite sex couples and it is silly to argue that they do.
Same sex couples function like roommates. Nothing more.
So do those who are infertile. Why are you not imposing a fertility requirement on marriage?
Religious views are a moot point. The argument stands on it's own merit.
You deflect from the question, fertility is ONLY relevant to opposite sex coupling. It is NEVER relevant to same sex coupling.
If you were trying to make the two comparable, it simply shows how very different they are.
The two groups function differently. That is not true of other civil rights.
Male/Female couples have specific and unique functions that same sex couples do not, nor, and this is important, CAN.
Asking to be equal, when equality is impossible is silly.
The law could make races equal, it can't make same sex coupling equal to opposite sex coupling.
Justices are powerful, but even they can't defeat nature.
The law doesn't discriminate on the basis of race or gender because neither is chosen by the individual.
The law also doesn't discriminate on the basis of religion and yet that is a matter of individual choice.
Since the law forbids discrimination based upon race and religion why must it discriminate based upon gender just to satisfy some religious homophobes who don't understand the law and what equality is all about?
Freedom of religion is written in the constitution itself. Go back and see where I have used religion as an argument. I know you want everyone who opposes you to do such, I find no need.
We discriminate every day based on disability or ability. Same sex couples do not function the same as opposite sex couples and it is silly to argue that they do.
Same sex couples function like roommates. Nothing more.
The law doesn't discriminate on the basis of race or gender because neither is chosen by the individual.
The law also doesn't discriminate on the basis of religion and yet that is a matter of individual choice.
Since the law forbids discrimination based upon race and religion why must it discriminate based upon gender just to satisfy some religious homophobes who don't understand the law and what equality is all about?
Freedom of religion is written in the constitution itself. Go back and see where I have used religion as an argument. I know you want everyone who opposes you to do such, I find no need.
We discriminate every day based on disability or ability. Same sex couples do not function the same as opposite sex couples and it is silly to argue that they do.
Same sex couples function like roommates. Nothing more.
Equal protection of the law is also written into the Constitution, as is individual liberty.
Are you denying that religions are homophobic?
So do those who are infertile. Why are you not imposing a fertility requirement on marriage?
Religious views are a moot point. The argument stands on it's own merit.
You deflect from the question, fertility is ONLY relevant to opposite sex coupling. It is NEVER relevant to same sex coupling.
If you were trying to make the two comparable, it simply shows how very different they are.
Religious homophobes are the primary opposition to gay marriage therefore they are anything but moot.
Only one deflecting is you because the issue of fertility is null and void as far as marriage is concerned.
Ironic!Religious views are a moot point. The argument stands on it's own merit.
You deflect from the question, fertility is ONLY relevant to opposite sex coupling. It is NEVER relevant to same sex coupling.
If you were trying to make the two comparable, it simply shows how very different they are.
Religious homophobes are the primary opposition to gay marriage therefore they are anything but moot.
Only one deflecting is you because the issue of fertility is null and void as far as marriage is concerned.
I know many non religious people who oppose same sex marriage. Your brush strokes are way too wide.
Procreation is only possible when males and females couple. It is NEVER possible with same sex.
The two groups are no where similar.
Can you make that claim with any other protected group?
Ironic!Religious homophobes are the primary opposition to gay marriage therefore they are anything but moot.
Only one deflecting is you because the issue of fertility is null and void as far as marriage is concerned.
I know many non religious people who oppose same sex marriage. Your brush strokes are way too wide.Procreation is only possible when males and females couple. It is NEVER possible with same sex.
The two groups are no where similar.
Can you make that claim with any other protected group?
Utterly irrelevant to the legal marriage contract. Onus remains on you to prove relevancy. Epic failure to date on your part is duly noted. Forecast for your continued failure to prove relevancy is 100%.
Ironic!Religious homophobes are the primary opposition to gay marriage therefore they are anything but moot.
Only one deflecting is you because the issue of fertility is null and void as far as marriage is concerned.
I know many non religious people who oppose same sex marriage. Your brush strokes are way too wide.Procreation is only possible when males and females couple. It is NEVER possible with same sex.
The two groups are no where similar.
Can you make that claim with any other protected group?
Utterly irrelevant to the legal marriage contract. Onus remains on you to prove relevancy. Epic failure to date on your part is duly noted. Forecast for your continued failure to prove relevancy is 100%.
