Reality: Homosexual Marriage

[USFREEDOM911]

Yeah, it took me a while to realize you were retarded, I once thought you were just really slow... maybe had a learning disability or something... but now I know.

That was a nice attempt to try and spin this away from your admission of how you described yourself; but unfortunetly, you rang that bell and now you can't retract the sound.

 

[Damocles]

Like I said, if and when the SCOTUS makes it "law of the land" for Gays to marry, you will see a Constitutional amendment, and it will pass with flying colors. You and the rest of these idiots grossly underestimate the number of people who OPPOSE Gay Marriage in America. When it is forced on them through the courts, they will rise up and be counted, and then it will be WAY too late to talk about Civil Unions or compromises, you'll have to live by what the Constitution says, and we'll just say, Tough SHIT, you should have accepted Civil Unions when you had the chance, GO FUCK YOURSELF!

It really won't take the SCOTUS, and I think you are hugely mistaken on believing you'll get 2/3 of the Senate and 3/4 of the states to agree to that Amendment.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

It's funny how you want to act like you are standing up for the rights of gay people, yet you somehow think it is the ultimate insult to insinuate someone is gay or likes gay sex. I think you are a homophobic hypocrite, and this whole "gay marriage" thing is a cover for your own bigoted insecurity. No one will ever suspect you are a homo-hater, you're out there on the front line doing battle for their cause and all... clever, but I see right through it.

OOOOOOOOO; that was a nice attempt at reflection.
The old: The best defense, is a good offense.

Unfortunetly, you failed to realize that it wasn't an attempt at an insult; but was instead meant to be amusing and poke fun at you.

And obviously it worked.
Score one for me.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Dumo: It's time to look into reality's face. Either stop with the lame rhetoric and get your reps to start pressing your idea, or you'll be standing there in the future with people pulling up this thread and laughing.

It's time for YOU to look into reality's face! Whoever the GOP candidate for president is in 2012, will certainly be asked about their position on Gay Marriage, and they will certainly support TRADITIONAL marriage between one man and one woman. So your 'choice' will be between the Marxist Socialist party of Obama, or one of them Bible-thumping Anti-gay marriage people! Take your pick, Dumo! Take your pick!

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

And now many people have you swayed away from what they believe??

Gee; I guess that makes your argument as convincing as mine; but it's the people that aren't on this board that you need to worry about, because more and more of them are leaning towards allowing same sex marriages.

But you go ahead and keep belting out, at the top of your voice:

WHEN YOU WISH UPON A STAR
MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHO YOU ARE
FOR WHEN YOU WISH UPON A STAR
YOUR DREAMS COME TRUE

And maybe someday you'll be a real boy, instead of a puppet.

Hey retard... YOU were the one claiming things were "moving" in your direction, why the fuck do I need to be swaying anyone? YOU are the one who needs to sway about 30-40% more of the people out there, the majority are on MY side! You sure you know how this shit works? Simple majority ratifies the amendment for the state... 3/4 of the states need to ratify with a simple majority... right now, you don't have the votes needed to stop such a ratification... better get busy swaying some opinions!

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

It really won't take the SCOTUS, and I think you are hugely mistaken on believing you'll get 2/3 of the Senate and 3/4 of the states to agree to that Amendment.

No, it will take the SCOTUS ruling Gay Marriage into law before you'll see a very large and angry vocal coalition stand up and demand an amendment to the Constitution. As of now, people are content to allow the states to decide, mostly because the states are overwhelmingly deciding AGAINST gay marriage.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

OOOOOOOOO; that was a nice attempt at reflection.
The old: The best defense, is a good offense.

Unfortunetly, you failed to realize that it wasn't an attempt at an insult; but was instead meant to be amusing and poke fun at you.

And obviously it worked.
Score one for me.

yeah, score one for the retard who doesn't even realize when he has shown his anti-gay bigotry!

 

[Damocles]

It's time for YOU to look into reality's face! Whoever the GOP candidate for president is in 2012, will certainly be asked about their position on Gay Marriage, and they will certainly support TRADITIONAL marriage between one man and one woman. So your 'choice' will be between the Marxist Socialist party of Obama, or one of them Bible-thumping Anti-gay marriage people! Take your pick, Dumo! Take your pick!

So, you're saying that you really don't want unions to pass, you'd rather sit around here trying to "insult" people who agree with you?...

I know who I'll vote for, so long as they promote a Balanced Budget Amendment with teeth and are fiscally conservative, as long as they'll actually begin the work on doing something about our borders...

I know I won't be voting for another GWB type, if we get another one like that I'll vote Libertarian instead.

 

[Timshel]

Sure there is! Most people do not favor same sex marriage, just like most people do not favor geezers marrying pubescent girls! We establish STANDARDS and that is how our laws are based, it's not "discrimination against dirty old men!" It's not "denying rights" to anyone! It's what society set as a BOUNDARY and LIMITATION on MARRIAGE!

So now it is based solely on majority will?

You were arguing before that it was based on tradition and any change to the traditions threatened to bring a plague upon us.

Majority will is no better refuge. There is a rational basis for denying minors the right to marry. We limit their rights in many ways, but it comes with greater protections. Protection of children is the interest in the state's restrictions on marriage or even sex with a minor. There is no legitimate state interests in limiting the rights of homosexuals. It is not done with the intent of protecting the homosexual, but to punish. To compare the two as being based on the same principles is ridiculous.

Majority will is subject to change and there is no reason why it should not change on this issue.

 

[Damocles]

You should also note that he no longer pretends to actually support civil unions, it is just something he throws out there so he can say, "See? You should have said okay to that back when I supported it!"

 

[Timshel]

And someone marrying a child effects you no more than any other marriage. Your point?

It does not. It's effect on me or to parties outside the marriage is not the reason we limit the rights of minor to marry.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

So, you're saying that you really don't want unions to pass, you'd rather sit around here trying to "insult" people who agree with you?...

I know who I'll vote for, so long as they promote a Balanced Budget Amendment with teeth and are fiscally conservative, as long as they'll actually begin the work on doing something about our borders...

I know I won't be voting for another GWB type, if we get another one like that I'll vote Libertarian instead.

I didn't say I didn't want CU, where did you read that into what I posted? I am just trying to prepare you for the reality of what lies ahead. If you have some lamebrain notion that the GOP will have some 'libertarian' type candidate who supports Gay Marriage, you're out of your fucking mind, it ain't going to happen. You may well vote for the Libertarian, and we may well get another 4 years of a Socialist regime in Washington!

 

[Timshel]

And my point, is that PMP is not affected by gay marriage in any significant way, as she claims. That should have been obvious.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

It does not. It's effect on me or to parties outside the marriage is not the reason we limit the rights of minor to marry.

Right, and it's also not the reason we prohibit same sex couples from marrying, so why do you continue to raise that as an argument? Glad you got that point, I was afraid it had flown over your pinhead!

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Hey retard... YOU were the one claiming things were "moving" in your direction, why the fuck do I need to be swaying anyone? YOU are the one who needs to sway about 30-40% more of the people out there, the majority are on MY side! You sure you know how this shit works? Simple majority ratifies the amendment for the state... 3/4 of the states need to ratify with a simple majority... right now, you don't have the votes needed to stop such a ratification... better get busy swaying some opinions!

Dixie, Dixie, Dixie!!

Please make a better attempt at staying on the matter at hand, please.
Your post was a distinct reference to "these boards" and now you switch gears and try to claim something else.

As years have gone by, more and more people are seeing that this denial is wrong and are changing their thoughts on it.
In you lifetime, you are just going to have to accept that same sex marriages will be legal and that's just the way it's going to be.

There is going to be no amendment, no matter how many tmes you wish for one.

Just because it's going to be legal; doesn't mean that you're going to be forced to marry anyone you don't want to.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

yeah, score one for the retard who doesn't even realize when he has shown his anti-gay bigotry!

Sorry Dixie; but you're in error, even on this.

How is that job of a projectionist working out for you??

 

[Timshel]

you don't think a reasonable person would expect someone to be sexually attracted to the opposite sex?.....

Someone, sure. The average person, yes. Everyone, no.

Likewise it would be reasonable to assume that someone is right handed, even that most are right handed, but not that everyone is right handed.

Being left handed or homosexual is abnormal. So fucking what?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

You should also note that he no longer pretends to actually support civil unions, it is just something he throws out there so he can say, "See? You should have said okay to that back when I supported it!"

He also seems to be getting more and more animated.
I certainly hope he doesn't have problems with his blood pressure.

 

[Damocles]

I didn't say I didn't want CU, where did you read that into what I posted? I am just trying to prepare you for the reality of what lies ahead. If you have some lamebrain notion that the GOP will have some 'libertarian' type candidate who supports Gay Marriage, you're out of your fucking mind, it ain't going to happen. You may well vote for the Libertarian, and we may well get another 4 years of a Socialist regime in Washington!

I am pointing out, in reality, gay marriage will happen across the land in our lifetime, unless we promote a solution that is different. I prefer to work towards less government power, to get them out of defining what is essentially a religious institution. If that means working with some idiot who thinks that gays don't get married in churches then so be it, let's just get started.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

You should also note that he no longer pretends to actually support civil unions, it is just something he throws out there so he can say, "See? You should have said okay to that back when I supported it!"

Dumo... Try really hard to let this penetrate your impenetrable empty head... I support Civil Unions... I do NOT support Gay Marriage! Got it???

I have no problem with adopting a comprehensive CU initiative, removing government from the "marriage license" business altogether, and allowing any two legal adults to enter into a partnership agreement together for the purpose of tax liabilities, and other benefits currently available to "traditional married couples." BUT.... I am staunchly, vehemently and firmly opposed, (and always will be), to any legal redefinition of traditional marriage. Whether that computes in your head, whether that makes sense to you, or not...whether that conforms to your logic.... is NOT my problem, that IS my position, and it has been my position for as long as I can recall. It didn't come about several years ago, I didn't 'come around' to your way of thinking, and it is not something I only recently began to advocate.

Now..... what might possibly change my mind about supporting CU's, would be if America were forced to ratify a Constitutional amendment recognizing marriage as being between one man and one woman.... IF that were to happen, I might be inclined to say... Ya know what? You guys had your chance to adopt CU and you refused to do so, you pushed and pushed this Gay Marriage idiocy until we had to pass an amendment to the freaking Constitution, so at this point, I really don't give two shits about what you want or finding a way to satisfy your side and you can kiss my ass!