Marital Counseling for Libertarians and Social Conservatives

PostmodernProphet said:
natural is not the same as normal....since the alternative to homosexuality being natural would have to be that it is supernatural, I expect there wasn't much doubt about it......
Click to expand...

never said it was

it is stupid to deny homosexuals the right to a government marriage contract when the act of homosexuality is not illegal
 
Yurt said:
i didn't misrepresent your position, you said the words....turn before birth

are you recanting?
Click to expand...
It appeared that you were ignoring the second portion of my position that some (probably most) turn queer after they are born.
 
Southern Man said:
It appeared that you were ignoring the second portion of my position that some (probably most) turn queer after they are born.
Click to expand...

nope....just pointing out that you said they (some) "turn" gay before they are born...

poor sinners can't get to heaven since they have already been "turned" gay before they are born
 
Damocles said:
No, you ignore important bits and make silly nonsense assertions that don't even make sense with the few things you have taken out of context.

I have been consistent, and will continue to be consistent.
Click to expand...

Yes, you continue to be consistently absurd and misuse the word "dogma" as emotive hyperbole. You continue to consistently show how stubborn and bull headed you can be, when challenged with your own words. And you continue to consistently show your ass and become more and more immature as the thread progresses. You're 'consistent' alright, I'll give you that one, Dumo!

I take the threads where you have clearly stated your Christianity to be truth. You have dogma.
Click to expand...

I once stated I was a Christian in an argument with someone else who claimed they were a Christian, and I did so for sake of argument. I've explained this, but you want to run around like a little retarded kid, acting like I didn't give an explanation, or you don't accept the explanation. I can't do anything about what you believe or your state of mental retardation. I know I am not a Christian, and if I AM a Christian and lying about not being one, then I am condemning myself to eternal damnation in denying my Christianity. So if I AM a Christian, I am a really stupid one.

It does say it is a sin, in fact it says it is an abomination. It is direct dogma.
Click to expand...

No, it's not "direct dogma" at all, and you actually made a compelling argument for that in another thread. You cited the fact that Jesus Christ (the man for whom Christianity is NAMED), never spoke specifically against homosexuality. We can pour through pages of argument from you, where the exact OPPOSITE is being claimed, that homosexuality doesn't even conflict with Christianity, much less violate the dogma.

Keeping the Sabbath holy is "direct dogma" and if Congress were trying to pass a law that we all must attend church and pray on Sunday, it would be an attempt to legislate dogma. That isn't what is being discussed.

I thought you were through with this nonsense, when we brought up the threads where you proclaimed your wholehearted Christianity. You have dogma.
Click to expand...

Why has your argument now been reduced to throwing up old threads pertaining to a personal matter regarding myself? Whether I am a Christian or not, is really beside the point here, isn't it? For the sake of argument (again) let's presume I AM a Christian as you claim.... Am I supposed to sacrifice my Constitutional right to petition for a redress of my grievances? Am I supposed to be disallowed to vote? Do I not have the right to free speech because you think I am a Christian? Maybe we should round up all "Christians" and shoot them in the head, since they obviously don't deserve to have the same rights as you, Dumo? Just please explain to me what my religious faith has to do with this conversation in any way? Even if it is my faith and I do have dogma, are you trying to deny my constitutional rights because you think my viewpoint is "dogma" when it's not?

No, the constitution proscribes theocracy, the attempt to assert it through legislation doesn't hold water.
Click to expand...

No one is establishing religion by opposing gay marriage, you have not made the connection, you can't even establish such a position amounts to religious dogma! It is a viewpoint based on morality, and we have established essentially EVERY law on the basis of our morality. To make the absurd claim that we can't do this or it amounts to legislating "dogma" is overblown hyperbole and a willing desire to outright deny people their god-given constitutional right to express their opinions politically. You're not a Libertarian at all, you are an Authoritarian! Your opinion and viewpoint is the only one with merit, and the only one which can be considered by the rest of society, because you say so!

But you do care, you've argued against it now for two threads worth of nonsense.
Click to expand...

I've argued against redefining "marriage" to suit our whims and desires, I think it's a very dangerous precedent to set. We can see the relative dangers just in your redefining "dogma" to make your case! If we can redefine "marriage" and "dogma" then we can just as easily redefine "consent" and "victim" as well as "liberty" and "freedom!"

I believe that you are lying here, (not that you don't belong to a church I can believe that, but I believe that you are and always will be a Christian) a form of Christian Taquiya, one that isn't supported by the Bible I might add. I base that on those threads here that don't just suggest you are Christian, they flat out state it with heavy conviction.
Click to expand...

Again, I don't give a flying fuck what you believe, it has nothing to do with the debate or the subject at hand. I don't know of too many Christians who believe you can denounce your Christian faith and still get into heaven, so if I am really a Christian, I am destined for eternity in hell because of my denial of being Christian. But really, what difference does it make? Is my "Christian" viewpoint somehow irrelevant in the arena of political discourse? I have the freedom to believe whatever I want to believe, and to express my opinion and viewpoints freely regarding legislation or any damn thing else I want to talk about in America, and you don't have the right to deny me that right!

Then why do you seek disagreement where we agree? This is a good solution, one which I have stated should be done for the decade we have known each other and one which you've recently just started promoting... We should work towards it rather than have you telling me anything about "defining marriage"... Let's work to get government out of marriage, all marriage including yours.
Click to expand...

Where we disagree, is your support for Gay Marriage. My solution recognizes BOTH sides of the issue, respects the religious viewpoints as well as the secular viewpoints, and seeks a compromise between the two. You don't respect the religious viewpoints, you are okay with the solution in so far as it gives you what you want, but best I can tell, the opposition seems to be in giving religious people what they want. You had rather keep the argument perpetuated, keep the issue on the table, so you can pound away at religion and those who have religious faith. To you, and others like you, it is far more important to continue your little crusade against religion, than to solve the problems for millions of gay couples out there.

No, you aren't. From your argument here one can reasonably see that you don't work towards this solution at all, it is convenient to say it, but then argue against it at every turn. You use it as a wedge and then tell people that you and others who think like you will pass an amendment to make your attempt at theocracy legal if they don't do what you want. The dichotomy is yours, you must resolve that within yourself. If you want this solution, let's work towards it.
Click to expand...

I've not used anything as a wedge, or backed away from my solution at all. I don't know where you get that... This conversation is about legalizing Gay Marriage, which I am opposed to. That isn't "working toward" my solution, that is ignoring my solution and continuing to wage your war on religion.

And for your information, if 3/4 of the states vote and ratify an amendment, we can make any goddamn thing we want a part of the Constitution, including making America a Christian Theocracy, if we so choose! The People have the power to render the entire Constitution null and void and call for a constitutional convention, where they could write anything they so desire in the Constitution. You need to take a refresher course on civics, Dumo!

The solution you supposedly propose has my support, I like it, I have promoted it for a much longer time than you have. I've worked towards getting the idea to as many religious conservatives as possible so that they may see the wisdom and carry that torch rather than one that attempts to supersede the 1st Amendment and legislate their dogma. I was thrilled when I first thought that you had come around, but then pages of nonsense about the definition of marriage (which we both supposedly agree shouldn't be in the government's purview) just bogs it all down. It took me a bit before I realized that your actual solution is the supposed constitutional amendment that would allow you to impose theocracy based in your religion on us and that your supposed proposed solution was just chaff.
Click to expand...

You're not supporting MY solution here! You are supporting Gay Marriage, and arguing against MY solution! You continue to do so by misusing terminology, here you misused "theocracy" again, which simply is dishonest and unsupportable as an argument. It's one absurdity stacked on top of another with you, in an attempt to continue the argument FOR GAY MARRIAGE! Stop trying to pretend you are FOR something else, you are not! You've proven that!
 
Can someone ask my bitch, Dixie, why she's ignoring my proof of her hypocrisy??

Dixie said:
No, you totally lied and misled, because you are a dishonest little fucktard, and that's how you roll.

You want to take bits and pieces of other things I have said, and things you may have even heard from others, and tie them with something else I stated from my personal life, to paint an abstract picture. I called you a liar and a dishonest fucktard for doing so, and now you want to act incredulous.
Click to expand...

Lets revisit this, shall we!!

Back on Post # 653, I made the following comment to Damo:
USFREEDOM911 said:
But he'll tell you how he calls his homosexual friends deviants, to their faces, and how he attended one of their immoral and heathen weddings.
Click to expand...

In Post #656, you made the following statement:
Dixie said:
STFU you dishonest piece of shit! I never said anything remotely close to that.
Click to expand...

In Post #658, I asked you for clarification:
USFREEDOM911 said:
Where in my post am I misleading?
Click to expand...

In Post #661, you made the accusation of:
Dixie said:
Where in your post are you NOT misleading? I didn't say what you claim I said! That's about as fucking straightforward as it gets, you are an outright LIAR!
Click to expand...
So I decided to go back and review past posts, just to make sure I hadn't confused someone else's comments and attributated them to you.
The following is only regarding you assertion that you didn't say your gay friends were deviants.
I've only brought forward the parts that pertain to this; but if you feel that I've left off something of importance, please show where.

Post #543
Dixie said:
I'll also take the opportunity to add, if we ever change the criteria for marriage, based on the fact that homosexuals wish to call same-sex unions "marriage" then we will establish that "marriage" is definable according to your sexual lifestyle, and the government will have a responsibility to ensure equality for all sexual deviants who wish to call their fetish "marriage" for as long as marriage is so defined in law. We have to apply whatever law we have equally, so if you change the parameters, expect the consequences.
Click to expand...

Post #545
USFREEDOM911 said:
Do you call your gay friends "deviants" and that the marriage you attended, a fetish??
Click to expand...

Post #598
USFREEDOM911 said:
You seem to be avoiding my question of; do you refer to your homosexual friends as deviants, to their face?? :palm:
Click to expand...

Post #600
Dixie said:
Yes, I tell them they are sick twisted freaks all the time, they laugh.
Click to expand...

You said "Yes" and it was to the question of deviancy.
Are you now going to try and spin this and say you meant something else?
That is probably a rhetorical question; because of course you are.

So now, can you show where I lied; or are you going to pussy out and run away like you do 2/3 of the time?
 
Dixie said:
Yes, you continue to be consistently absurd and misuse the word "dogma" as emotive hyperbole. You continue to consistently show how stubborn and bull headed you can be, when challenged with your own words. And you continue to consistently show your ass and become more and more immature as the thread progresses. You're 'consistent' alright, I'll give you that one, Dumo!
Click to expand...

Nonsense and blather. I've held the same opinion on this topic for the past decade that we have known each other. Acting "shocked" at what I say now is just inane, pretending it isn't consistent is equally inane.


I once stated I was a Christian in an argument with someone else who claimed they were a Christian, and I did so for sake of argument. I've explained this, but you want to run around like a little retarded kid, acting like I didn't give an explanation, or you don't accept the explanation. I can't do anything about what you believe or your state of mental retardation. I know I am not a Christian, and if I AM a Christian and lying about not being one, then I am condemning myself to eternal damnation in denying my Christianity. So if I AM a Christian, I am a really stupid one.
Click to expand...
You did so several times and links to it was posted again about 1-2 months ago. I've explained this. I trust what you said then over what you are saying now as you had no motive to lie then, you do now.

No, it's not "direct dogma" at all, and you actually made a compelling argument for that in another thread. You cited the fact that Jesus Christ (the man for whom Christianity is NAMED), never spoke specifically against homosexuality. We can pour through pages of argument from you, where the exact OPPOSITE is being claimed, that homosexuality doesn't even conflict with Christianity, much less violate the dogma.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is. Not opinion, it is simply a rule listed in the book. A proscription on homosexual activity is part of the dogma of your religion. (The one you so eagerly professed your undying devotion to.)

Keeping the Sabbath holy is "direct dogma" and if Congress were trying to pass a law that we all must attend church and pray on Sunday, it would be an attempt to legislate dogma. That isn't what is being discussed.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is, and so is "Homosexuality is an abomination"...

Why has your argument now been reduced to throwing up old threads pertaining to a personal matter regarding myself? Whether I am a Christian or not, is really beside the point here, isn't it? For the sake of argument (again) let's presume I AM a Christian as you claim.... Am I supposed to sacrifice my Constitutional right to petition for a redress of my grievances? Am I supposed to be disallowed to vote? Do I not have the right to free speech because you think I am a Christian? Maybe we should round up all "Christians" and shoot them in the head, since they obviously don't deserve to have the same rights as you, Dumo? Just please explain to me what my religious faith has to do with this conversation in any way? Even if it is my faith and I do have dogma, are you trying to deny my constitutional rights because you think my viewpoint is "dogma" when it's not?
Click to expand...

It hasn't. My argument has remained the same. You bring it up here because you now find it inconvenient to your supposed nonchalance on the issue of the dogma of the religion you so profoundly believe. You should be ashamed that you would begin to deny it now.

No one is establishing religion by opposing gay marriage, you have not made the connection, you can't even establish such a position amounts to religious dogma! It is a viewpoint based on morality, and we have established essentially EVERY law on the basis of our morality. To make the absurd claim that we can't do this or it amounts to legislating "dogma" is overblown hyperbole and a willing desire to outright deny people their god-given constitutional right to express their opinions politically. You're not a Libertarian at all, you are an Authoritarian! Your opinion and viewpoint is the only one with merit, and the only one which can be considered by the rest of society, because you say so!
Click to expand...
They wouldn't be establishing religion if they oppose it, they would be if they were attempting to establish their dogma into legislation.

I've argued against redefining "marriage" to suit our whims and desires, I think it's a very dangerous precedent to set. We can see the relative dangers just in your redefining "dogma" to make your case! If we can redefine "marriage" and "dogma" then we can just as easily redefine "consent" and "victim" as well as "liberty" and "freedom!"
Click to expand...
While still ignoring that the solution you supposedly support would allow it.


Again, I don't give a flying fuck what you believe, it has nothing to do with the debate or the subject at hand. I don't know of too many Christians who believe you can denounce your Christian faith and still get into heaven, so if I am really a Christian, I am destined for eternity in hell because of my denial of being Christian. But really, what difference does it make? Is my "Christian" viewpoint somehow irrelevant in the arena of political discourse? I have the freedom to believe whatever I want to believe, and to express my opinion and viewpoints freely regarding legislation or any damn thing else I want to talk about in America, and you don't have the right to deny me that right!
Click to expand...
You would if I started legislating it onto you, like you attempt to do to others with your promise of an amendment that would allow you to. (At least you recognize that previous attempts are unconstitutional.)

Where we disagree, is your support for Gay Marriage. My solution recognizes BOTH sides of the issue, respects the religious viewpoints as well as the secular viewpoints, and seeks a compromise between the two. You don't respect the religious viewpoints, you are okay with the solution in so far as it gives you what you want, but best I can tell, the opposition seems to be in giving religious people what they want. You had rather keep the argument perpetuated, keep the issue on the table, so you can pound away at religion and those who have religious faith. To you, and others like you, it is far more important to continue your little crusade against religion, than to solve the problems for millions of gay couples out there.
Click to expand...

It isn't "support" to point out that gays are already married whether you like the definition or not, they are equally married as all the billions that were married in churches before there was licensing in order to stop the "Mormons"... I just point out reality, with as much "support" that pointing out that 2+2=4...

I've not used anything as a wedge, or backed away from my solution at all. I don't know where you get that... This conversation is about legalizing Gay Marriage, which I am opposed to. That isn't "working toward" my solution, that is ignoring my solution and continuing to wage your war on religion.
Click to expand...
Right, that's why you "threaten" everybody with an Amendment "so there" as you did in the other thread. You've been caught and you're embarrassed. I understand, but it is so very obvious to the rest of us that there really is no argument.

And for your information, if 3/4 of the states vote and ratify an amendment, we can make any goddamn thing we want a part of the Constitution, including making America a Christian Theocracy, if we so choose! The People have the power to render the entire Constitution null and void and call for a constitutional convention, where they could write anything they so desire in the Constitution. You need to take a refresher course on civics, Dumo!
Click to expand...

Yes, if 3/4 of the states ratify an Amendment passed by 2/3 of the Congress then it would be entirely legal for you to press your dogma onto us in legislation.

You're not supporting MY solution here! You are supporting Gay Marriage, and arguing against MY solution! You continue to do so by misusing terminology, here you misused "theocracy" again, which simply is dishonest and unsupportable as an argument. It's one absurdity stacked on top of another with you, in an attempt to continue the argument FOR GAY MARRIAGE! Stop trying to pretend you are FOR something else, you are not! You've proven that!
Click to expand...
Again, I don't care about Gay Marriage, I simply point out that this solution allows it, and you continue to ignore that because you can't stand that your dogma would no longer be protected by the government in legislation. I'm sure you will threaten again a constitutional amendment. You are entirely wrong that people would support it.
 
Yurt said:
nope....just pointing out that you said they (some) "turn" gay before they are born...

poor sinners can't get to heaven since they have already been "turned" gay before they are born
Click to expand...
My position is that those who are born gay are due to a birth defect. Other gays, probably most, turn gay due to their environment.
 
You're being ignored because you are irrelevant. You want to divert the topic of conversation off into some myopic 'discrepancy' you think you found, and I am not interested in entertaining your retarded ass. Get back on the subject, and post something relative to the debate, and maybe I will respond to you again. So long as you want to act like a retard, expect to be ignored by me.
 
Dixie said:
You're being ignored because you are irrelevant. You want to divert the topic of conversation off into some myopic 'discrepancy' you think you found, and I am not interested in entertaining your retarded ass. Get back on the subject, and post something relative to the debate, and maybe I will respond to you again. So long as you want to act like a retard, expect to be ignored by me.
Click to expand...

Now it's a "minor discrepancy" when you agreed that homosexuality was an abomination and deviant, which you said you told your gay married friends; but then you tried to deny saying it.

You said I lied in my post, refused to show where, and now you're crying like a bitch; because I used your own words to show your hypocrisy.

Either refute my earlier post, or remain a whiny little bitch; because you're trying to take some kind of moral stand and you're the one that is immoral.

C'mon bitch, man up or puss out. :good4u:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top