12 midnight - 3:00am
Shit goes down.
Main Characters:
Liberal Andy: A complete idiot full of contridiction
Liberal Paul: Lesser idiot, but mildly drunk and logically challenged
Jessie: Tranditionalist Warrior and Fiancee of Yankee Conservative
Yankee Conservative: Me
The Below dialogue provides the information and tactics you need to pown conspirators of the radical gay agenda. The liberal players provide ZERO contraction to me and Jessie's points. Their liberal logic is a tribute to classical absurdity and the public education scam. Get some popcorn and get ready to laugh.
POST:
" In
32 states the issue of gay marriage has come before the electorate and 32 times
that electorate chose to protect marriage and define it as the union of one man
and one woman. So it peeves me to no end when I read one of the cadre of
supposedly conservative pundits advocating that we give up on protecting
marriage, suggesting it is a battle we cannot possibly win."
Homophobia-phobia
|Blogs | NCRegister.com www.ncregister.com
Comment War:
Supporter:
This
is a systematic stripping of the meaning of marriage and it needs to stop. The Catholic
church has taken a beaten from this administration and they need to show their
anger at the polls.
Paul What's one man and one
woman have to do with marriage? Shouldn't marriage be about love? Who cares if
a bunch of fags and lesbos want to get married. If they love each other and
want to get married, then let them. The rights of marriage is something stupid
to argue about, there are a lot more problems in this world greater than
marriage, especially since marriage is something that's a personal issue
between two people.
Jessie I love my dog so should I
be allowed to marry it? Sounds silly doesn't it? Gay "Marriage" is
not about love. Marriage is the cornerstone of society. All of society comes
out of marriage. There are about 3000 give or take federal and state benefits
that are associated with marriage which were created to benefit those that
chose to marry and have children. A child deserves a mother and a father. The
number one indicator of poverty and criminality is having a single mother (homosexual
marriages are 4x more likely to fail than a heterosexual one). Our system is
already overburdened and we should not be allotting additional benefits to
people who are incapable of creating future tax payers.Also, as a loving human
I cannot condone a life style that takes 30 years off of someone's life and
makes them more likely to be addicted to controlled substances, more likely to
be mentally ill, more likely to commit suicide, more likely to be a victim of
murder, more likely to die of AIDS...etc etc (source Dr. Janet Smith). Or
nevermind the fact that homosexuality is the only mental illness to EVER be
declared not a mental illness by a popular vote in lieu of scientific evidence
or studies. The decision to take homosexuality out of the DSMV was actually
made by the President of the APA because him and other high ranking members
within the APA were receiving death threats from militant homosexuals. So in 15
years are we going to allow schizophrenics to marry the voices in their heads?
Finally, I fully support state's rights. The majority of states have decided
that gay "marriage" is ultimately harmful to our society.
Liberal Andy I don't know who you
are, or why you're on my newsfeed, but I just want to let you know that you
just wrote one of the most ignorant and intolerant things I've ever seen.
Homosexuality takes 30 years off you're life? Being gay is a mental illness?
I'm half tempted to think this is a joke. I'm sure you're getting your facts
from the same people who categorically deny evolution and want to teach
creationist fairy tales in public schools. You do NOT have the right to control
anyone else based on rules you read in a 2000 year old book, and the fact that
you think you do surpasses the term arrogance and has flown straight through to
megalomania.
Jessie 1. The Catholic Church
is behind The Big Bang Theory and genetics. You're welcome
2. On the subject of science, why don't you read some studies, here are 129 that cull the information I cited: Tracking the Hidden Epidemics: Trends in STDs in the United States, 2000," Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), available at www.cdc.gov.
Becky Birtha, "Gay Parents and the Adoption Option," The Philadelphia Inquirer, March 04, 2002, www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/ 2787531.htm; Grant Pick, "Make Room for Daddy — and Poppa," The Chicago Tribune Internet Edition, March 24, 2002, www.chicagotribune.com/features/magazine/chi- 0203240463mar24.story
Ellen C. Perrin, et al., "Technical Report: Coparent or Second-Parent Adoption by Same-Sex Parents," Pediatrics, 109(2): 341-344 (2002).
Gabriel Rotello, Sexual Ecology: AIDS and the Destiny of Gay Men, p. 112, New York: Penguin Group, 1998 (quoting gay writer Michael Lynch).
Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A study of Diversity Among Men and Women, p. 308, Table 7, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978.
2. On the subject of science, why don't you read some studies, here are 129 that cull the information I cited: Tracking the Hidden Epidemics: Trends in STDs in the United States, 2000," Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), available at www.cdc.gov.
Becky Birtha, "Gay Parents and the Adoption Option," The Philadelphia Inquirer, March 04, 2002, www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/ 2787531.htm; Grant Pick, "Make Room for Daddy — and Poppa," The Chicago Tribune Internet Edition, March 24, 2002, www.chicagotribune.com/features/magazine/chi- 0203240463mar24.story
Ellen C. Perrin, et al., "Technical Report: Coparent or Second-Parent Adoption by Same-Sex Parents," Pediatrics, 109(2): 341-344 (2002).
Gabriel Rotello, Sexual Ecology: AIDS and the Destiny of Gay Men, p. 112, New York: Penguin Group, 1998 (quoting gay writer Michael Lynch).
Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A study of Diversity Among Men and Women, p. 308, Table 7, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978.
Jessie Gabriel Rotello, Sexual
Ecology: AIDS and the Destiny of Gay Men, p. 112, New York: Penguin Group, 1998
(quoting gay writer Michael Lynch).
Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A study of Diversity Among Men and Women, p. 308, Table 7, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978.
Leon McKusick, et al., "Reported Changes in the Sexual Behavior of Men at Risk for AIDS, San Francisco, 1982-84 — the AIDS Behavioral Research Project," Public Health Reports, 100(6): 622-629, p. 625, Table 1 (November- December 1985). In 1982 respondents reported an average of 4.7 new partners in the prior month; in 1984, respondents reported an average of 2.5 new partners in the prior month.
"Increases in Unsafe Sex and Rectal Gonorrhea among Men Who Have Sex with Men — San Francisco, California, 1994-1997," Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Report, CDC, 48(03): 45-48, p. 45 (January 29, 1999).
This was evident by the late 80's and early 90's. Jeffrey A. Kelly, PhD, et al., "Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/ Human Immunodeficiency Virus Risk Behavior Among Gay Men in Small Cities," Archives of Internal Medicine, 152: 2293-2297, pp. 2295-2296 (November 1992); Donald R. Hoover, et al., "Estimating the 1978-1990 and Future Spread of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 in Subgroups of Homosexual Men," American Journal of Epidemiology, 134(10): 1190-1205, p. 1203 (1991).
A lesbian pastor made this assertion during a question and answer session that followed a presentation the author made on homosexual health risks at the Chatauqua Institute in Western New York, summer 2001.
Paul Van de Ven, et al., "Facts & Figures: 2000 Male Out Survey," p. 20 & Table 20, monograph published by National Centre in HIV Social Research Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, The University of New South Wales, February 2001.
Rotello, pp. 43-46.
Ibid., pp. 165-172.
Hoover, et al., Figure 3.
"Basic Statistics," CDC — Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, June 2001, www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats.htm. (Nearly 8% (50,066) of men with AIDS had sex with men and used intravenous drugs. These men are included in the 64% figure (411,933) of 649,186 men who have been diagnosed with AIDS.)
Figures from a study presented at the Infectious Diseases Society of America meeting in San Francisco and reported by Christopher Heredia, "Big spike in cases of syphilis in S.F.: Gay, bisexual men affected most," San Francisco Chronicle, October 26, 2001, www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/ article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/10/26/MN7489 3.DTL.
Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A study of Diversity Among Men and Women, p. 308, Table 7, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978.
Leon McKusick, et al., "Reported Changes in the Sexual Behavior of Men at Risk for AIDS, San Francisco, 1982-84 — the AIDS Behavioral Research Project," Public Health Reports, 100(6): 622-629, p. 625, Table 1 (November- December 1985). In 1982 respondents reported an average of 4.7 new partners in the prior month; in 1984, respondents reported an average of 2.5 new partners in the prior month.
"Increases in Unsafe Sex and Rectal Gonorrhea among Men Who Have Sex with Men — San Francisco, California, 1994-1997," Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Report, CDC, 48(03): 45-48, p. 45 (January 29, 1999).
This was evident by the late 80's and early 90's. Jeffrey A. Kelly, PhD, et al., "Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/ Human Immunodeficiency Virus Risk Behavior Among Gay Men in Small Cities," Archives of Internal Medicine, 152: 2293-2297, pp. 2295-2296 (November 1992); Donald R. Hoover, et al., "Estimating the 1978-1990 and Future Spread of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 in Subgroups of Homosexual Men," American Journal of Epidemiology, 134(10): 1190-1205, p. 1203 (1991).
A lesbian pastor made this assertion during a question and answer session that followed a presentation the author made on homosexual health risks at the Chatauqua Institute in Western New York, summer 2001.
Paul Van de Ven, et al., "Facts & Figures: 2000 Male Out Survey," p. 20 & Table 20, monograph published by National Centre in HIV Social Research Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, The University of New South Wales, February 2001.
Rotello, pp. 43-46.
Ibid., pp. 165-172.
Hoover, et al., Figure 3.
"Basic Statistics," CDC — Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, June 2001, www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats.htm. (Nearly 8% (50,066) of men with AIDS had sex with men and used intravenous drugs. These men are included in the 64% figure (411,933) of 649,186 men who have been diagnosed with AIDS.)
Figures from a study presented at the Infectious Diseases Society of America meeting in San Francisco and reported by Christopher Heredia, "Big spike in cases of syphilis in S.F.: Gay, bisexual men affected most," San Francisco Chronicle, October 26, 2001, www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/ article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/10/26/MN7489 3.DTL.
Liberal Andy All I see is someone
trying to justify controlling other people's lives. That's an impossible thing
to justify. Marriage does not belong to you, or the catholic church.
Jessie "Officials Voice Alarm
Over Halt in AIDS Decline," New York Times, August 14, 2001.
"A uniform definition of a circuit party does not exist, partly because such parties continue to evolve. However, a circuit party tends to be a multi-event weekend that occurs each year at around the same time and in the same town . . . ." Gordon Mansergh, Grant Colfax, et al., "The Circuit Party Men's Health Survey: Findings and Implications for Gay and Bisexual Men," American Journal of Public Health, 91(6): 953-958, p. 953 (June 2001).
Ibid., p. 955.
Ibid., p. 956.
Ibid., pp. 956-957, Tables 2 & 3.
Ibid., pp. 956-957.
Ibid., p. 957. The authors' recommendation was more education.
Julie Robotham, "Safe sex by arrangement as gay men reject condoms," Sydney Morning Herald, June 7, 2001. Data source: 2000 Male Out Survey, National Centre in HIV Social Research, Australia.
R. S. Hogg, S. A. Strathdee, et al., "Modeling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men," International Journal of Epidemiology, 26(3): 657-661, p. 659 (1997). Death as the result of HIV infection has dropped significantly since 1996. "Life Expectancy Hits New High in 2000; Mortality Declines for Several Leading Causes of Death," CDC News Release, October 10, 2001, www.cdc.gov/nchs/releases/01news/mort2k.htm. Nevertheless, it remains a significant factor in shortened life expectancy for homosexual practitioners.
Press Release, Smoking costs nation $150 billion each year in health costs, lost productivity, CDC, Office of Communication, April 12, 2002, www.cdc.gov/od/oc/media/ pressrel/r020412.htm.
Hogg, et al., p. 660.
Ibid.
"Hepatitis A vaccination of men who have sex with men — Atlanta, Georgia, 1996-1997," Morbidity and Mortality Report, CDC, 47(34): 708-711 (September 4, 1998).
Robert T. Michael, et al., p. 89.
Ibid., p. 101.
Camille Paglia, "I'll take religion over gay culture," Salon.com online magazine, June 1998, www.frontpagemag.com/archives/guest_column/ paglia/gayculture.htm.
Gordon Mansergh, Grant Colfax, et al., p. 955.
Joseph Harry, Gay Couples, p. 116, New York: Praeger Books, 1984.
Marcel T. Saghir, M.D. and Eli Robins, M.D., Male and Female Homosexuality: A Comprehensive Investigation, p. 57 Table 4.13, p. 225 Table 12.10, Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Company, 1973.
The existence of limited homosexual relationships in primitive cultures, or even extensive homosexuality in declining civilizations, such as those cited by advocates of same-sex marriage, does not challenge the existence of a prevailing norm. See, for example, William N. Eskridge, Jr., The Case for Same-Sex Marriage, Chapter 2, New York: The Free Press, 1996.
Joseph D. Unwin, "Sexual Regulations and Cultural Behaviour," pp. 18-19, reprint of Oxford University
"A uniform definition of a circuit party does not exist, partly because such parties continue to evolve. However, a circuit party tends to be a multi-event weekend that occurs each year at around the same time and in the same town . . . ." Gordon Mansergh, Grant Colfax, et al., "The Circuit Party Men's Health Survey: Findings and Implications for Gay and Bisexual Men," American Journal of Public Health, 91(6): 953-958, p. 953 (June 2001).
Ibid., p. 955.
Ibid., p. 956.
Ibid., pp. 956-957, Tables 2 & 3.
Ibid., pp. 956-957.
Ibid., p. 957. The authors' recommendation was more education.
Julie Robotham, "Safe sex by arrangement as gay men reject condoms," Sydney Morning Herald, June 7, 2001. Data source: 2000 Male Out Survey, National Centre in HIV Social Research, Australia.
R. S. Hogg, S. A. Strathdee, et al., "Modeling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men," International Journal of Epidemiology, 26(3): 657-661, p. 659 (1997). Death as the result of HIV infection has dropped significantly since 1996. "Life Expectancy Hits New High in 2000; Mortality Declines for Several Leading Causes of Death," CDC News Release, October 10, 2001, www.cdc.gov/nchs/releases/01news/mort2k.htm. Nevertheless, it remains a significant factor in shortened life expectancy for homosexual practitioners.
Press Release, Smoking costs nation $150 billion each year in health costs, lost productivity, CDC, Office of Communication, April 12, 2002, www.cdc.gov/od/oc/media/ pressrel/r020412.htm.
Hogg, et al., p. 660.
Ibid.
"Hepatitis A vaccination of men who have sex with men — Atlanta, Georgia, 1996-1997," Morbidity and Mortality Report, CDC, 47(34): 708-711 (September 4, 1998).
Robert T. Michael, et al., p. 89.
Ibid., p. 101.
Camille Paglia, "I'll take religion over gay culture," Salon.com online magazine, June 1998, www.frontpagemag.com/archives/guest_column/ paglia/gayculture.htm.
Gordon Mansergh, Grant Colfax, et al., p. 955.
Joseph Harry, Gay Couples, p. 116, New York: Praeger Books, 1984.
Marcel T. Saghir, M.D. and Eli Robins, M.D., Male and Female Homosexuality: A Comprehensive Investigation, p. 57 Table 4.13, p. 225 Table 12.10, Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Company, 1973.
The existence of limited homosexual relationships in primitive cultures, or even extensive homosexuality in declining civilizations, such as those cited by advocates of same-sex marriage, does not challenge the existence of a prevailing norm. See, for example, William N. Eskridge, Jr., The Case for Same-Sex Marriage, Chapter 2, New York: The Free Press, 1996.
Joseph D. Unwin, "Sexual Regulations and Cultural Behaviour," pp. 18-19, reprint of Oxford University
Jessie Press publication of
speech given before the Medical Section of the British Psychological Society,
March 27, 1935.
For example, see the website of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, Inc., www.ncsfreedom.org.
"The ACLU believes that criminal and civil laws prohibiting or penalizing the practice of plural marriage violate constitutional protections . . . ." 1992 Policy Guide of the ACLU, Policy #91, p. 175.
Judith Levine, Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002; Bruce Rind, Philip Tromovitch, and Robert Bauserman, "A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples," Psychological Bulletin, 124(1): 22-53 (July 1998).
Paglia, June 23, 1998.
Rotello, p. 42.
Goode, August 19, 2001.
Ibid.
See Michael Hamrick, The Hidden Costs of Domestic Partner Benefits, pp. 3-4 (Corporate Resource Council, 2002).
David Gelman, et al., "Tune In, Come Out," Newsweek, p. 70, November 8, 1993.
"Iowa study suggests tolerance of homosexuals is growing," Associated Press, March 23, 2001.
Sally Kohn, The Domestic Partnership Organizing Manual for Employee Benefits, p. 1, the Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, www.ngltf.org/ downloads/dp-/dp_99.pdf.
John Horgan, "Gay Genes, Revisited," Scientific American, p. 26, November 1995.
Matthew Brelis, "The Fading 'Gay Gene,'" The Boston Globe, March 20, 2002, p. C1.
Michael, et al., p. 172.
Lynn Scherr, "Lesbian Leader Loves a Man," ABCNews.com, April 17, 1998.
"Former Lesbian Anne Heche Engaged to Cameraman," ABCNews.com, June 1, 2001 (emphasis added), reprinted at www.gaywired.com/index.cfm?linkPage=/storydetail.cf m&Section=68&ID=5304.
"The Facts: Anne Heche," Eonline.msn, April 1, 2002, www.eonline.com/Facts/People/Bio/0,128,31319,00.html.
"Sinead O'Connor to Marry a Man," Reuters, June 27, 2000, www.q.co.za/2001.2001.06.27-sinead.html.
"Sinead Drops out of Wotapalava Tour," JAM! Music, May 31, 2001, www.canoe.ca/JamMusicArtistsO/oconnor_ sinead.html.
John Stoltenberg, "Living with Andrea Dworkin," Lambda Book Report, May/June 1994, reprinted at www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/LivingWithAnd rea.html.
Julie Robotham, "Safe sex by arrangement as gay men reject condoms," The Sydney Morning Herald, June 7, 2001. Data source: "2000 Male Out Survey," National Centre in HIV Social Research, Australia.
Michael, et al., p. 172.
Edward O. Laumann, John H. Gagnon, et al., The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States, p. 293, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994; Michael, et al., p. 176; David Forman and Clair Chilvers, "Sexual Behavior of Young and Middle-Aged Men in England and Wales," British Medical Journal, 298: 1137-1142 (1989); and Gary Remafedi, et al., "Demography of Sexual Orientation in Adolescents," Pediatrics, 89: 714-721 (1992).
For example, see the website of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, Inc., www.ncsfreedom.org.
"The ACLU believes that criminal and civil laws prohibiting or penalizing the practice of plural marriage violate constitutional protections . . . ." 1992 Policy Guide of the ACLU, Policy #91, p. 175.
Judith Levine, Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002; Bruce Rind, Philip Tromovitch, and Robert Bauserman, "A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples," Psychological Bulletin, 124(1): 22-53 (July 1998).
Paglia, June 23, 1998.
Rotello, p. 42.
Goode, August 19, 2001.
Ibid.
See Michael Hamrick, The Hidden Costs of Domestic Partner Benefits, pp. 3-4 (Corporate Resource Council, 2002).
David Gelman, et al., "Tune In, Come Out," Newsweek, p. 70, November 8, 1993.
"Iowa study suggests tolerance of homosexuals is growing," Associated Press, March 23, 2001.
Sally Kohn, The Domestic Partnership Organizing Manual for Employee Benefits, p. 1, the Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, www.ngltf.org/ downloads/dp-/dp_99.pdf.
John Horgan, "Gay Genes, Revisited," Scientific American, p. 26, November 1995.
Matthew Brelis, "The Fading 'Gay Gene,'" The Boston Globe, March 20, 2002, p. C1.
Michael, et al., p. 172.
Lynn Scherr, "Lesbian Leader Loves a Man," ABCNews.com, April 17, 1998.
"Former Lesbian Anne Heche Engaged to Cameraman," ABCNews.com, June 1, 2001 (emphasis added), reprinted at www.gaywired.com/index.cfm?linkPage=/storydetail.cf m&Section=68&ID=5304.
"The Facts: Anne Heche," Eonline.msn, April 1, 2002, www.eonline.com/Facts/People/Bio/0,128,31319,00.html.
"Sinead O'Connor to Marry a Man," Reuters, June 27, 2000, www.q.co.za/2001.2001.06.27-sinead.html.
"Sinead Drops out of Wotapalava Tour," JAM! Music, May 31, 2001, www.canoe.ca/JamMusicArtistsO/oconnor_ sinead.html.
John Stoltenberg, "Living with Andrea Dworkin," Lambda Book Report, May/June 1994, reprinted at www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/LivingWithAnd rea.html.
Julie Robotham, "Safe sex by arrangement as gay men reject condoms," The Sydney Morning Herald, June 7, 2001. Data source: "2000 Male Out Survey," National Centre in HIV Social Research, Australia.
Michael, et al., p. 172.
Edward O. Laumann, John H. Gagnon, et al., The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States, p. 293, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994; Michael, et al., p. 176; David Forman and Clair Chilvers, "Sexual Behavior of Young and Middle-Aged Men in England and Wales," British Medical Journal, 298: 1137-1142 (1989); and Gary Remafedi, et al., "Demography of Sexual Orientation in Adolescents," Pediatrics, 89: 714-721 (1992).
Jessie 3. I never once used
religion in my reasoning, so lay off the Ad-Hominem attacks.
4. So you come to try and insult me to prove your moral superiority? That's just cute. Have a nice day in your anti science fairy tale land where you blame religion for your every failure as a human being.
4. So you come to try and insult me to prove your moral superiority? That's just cute. Have a nice day in your anti science fairy tale land where you blame religion for your every failure as a human being.
Liberal Andy You submitted this post
through a Catholic Facebook page.
Jessie So you get to define marriage and control
people? How presumptuous. The United States government has chosen to subsidize
traditional marriage. The nature of male/female marriage leads directly to the
building blocks of a nation just like the cells of a body. Strong families and
a productive future citizenry result from a permanent and loving union between
one male and one female. If we don’t see this clear connection to our society,
we’re just not looking. The very idea that The State should NOT give incentive
& recognize a procreative union as unique from other types of human unions
boggles the mind.
Jessie Yes, you are so right. I
posted a blog article off of the National Catholic Register. My argument that
I've made in subsequent posts is completely invalid and irrelevant. Seriously?
So following your logic the atheist Soviet Union murdered approximately 61
million people. Atheism is the cause of murder. Atheists want to murder
everyone.
Liberal Andy My logic is pretty sound, I don't think you
could have found such homophobic and bigoted article on a secular blog.
Liberal Paul But who cares when there are greater
problems like world hunger, poverty, global warming, conservatives, wars that
are started for no reason, among other things. Who cares about marriage now
these days? Atleast the homosexualls love each other, seems like everyone else
just wants flings anyways.
Jessie Liberal Andy please don't waste anymore of
my time until you have read all 129 of my secular sources thank you,
Jessie Paul, all of a society's
problems are uniquely intertwined. You obviously care about gay marriage or
else you wouldn't be posting on this. I care about marriage because it is the
cornerstone of society. When marriages crumble society crumbles. The number one
indicator of poverty is whether or not a person was raised without a father in
the home.
Liberal Andy Literally no source you
post would give you the right to decide morality for someone else.
Jessie Please show me where I
have made any statements about the morality of homosexuality.
Liberal Andy Wait, do you think
homosexuality is moral? Don't say that's irrelevant, because it's absolutely
relevant. Do you think homosexuality is moral or immoral?
Liberal Paul So then what about single
mothers? They think they find the guy the love and have a baby with him, only
for him to turn around and find some hoochie instead. Happens to nice girls all
the time. Or women that decided to do it on there own. I have my own son, and
i'd give everything in the world to be back with his mother, but all shit wants
to do is sleep around. So are you saying my son won't be successful just
because he doesn't live with me? I don't think so. I may be a drop out, but I'm
still pretty damn intelligent and I'm going to make sure my son is smarter than
me, goes further than me, and does the best that he can because I'm not letting
him make the same mistakes I did.
Jessie Being homosexual is
morally neutral, just like heterosexuality. Citing a study from the International
Journal of Epidemology that found that homosexual men live 30 years less than
heterosexual men is not a moral judgement, it is a statement of fact.
Jessie Paul, that is good and I
am happy for you, but you cannot deny scientific fact. Social statistics are
constantly gathered and interpreted. Studies are done every day by various
researchers. There will always be outliers- and I hope that your son is one.
Liberal Paul And also, yes I do care
about homosexual marriage. I have two lesbian aunts that have been together
since before I was even born. They love each other so I think they have every
right to get married. Now as for the post above, my mistake for typos, I'm a
little tipsy...
Jessie I have many homosexual
family members and friends as well. The government has never chosen to
recognize marriage because of love. Ever. It has been recognized because its
existence creates the most productive members of society which is why the
government has chosen to subsidize it. I'm sure your aunts are very lovely
people, but they do not deserve the same incentives (3,000+) that are reserved
for married people who contribute to the next generation's labor force and
taxpayers. It makes no economic sense. Nothing is stopping them from being
married, our government has just chosen not to recognize it since it is not in
the nation's best interest to subsidize.
Liberal Andy " I'm sure your
aunts are very lovely people, but they do not deserve the same incentives
(3,000+) that are reserved for married people who contribute to the next
generation's labor force and taxpayers."
How can you make that argument? It's absurd. Should married couples be required to have children? Also, you say that being gay is morally neutral, but earlier compared it to bestiality? Give me a break. Your position is indefensible.
How can you make that argument? It's absurd. Should married couples be required to have children? Also, you say that being gay is morally neutral, but earlier compared it to bestiality? Give me a break. Your position is indefensible.
Liberal Paul Times have changed
though, we aren't livng in the 50's. Just like in heterosexual relationships,
women want something different now. If you treat a girl amazingly and do thing
in an old fashioned manner, a girl will leave your ass in a heart beat. I know
this from experience. The only girls that wanted me were the ones I cheated on
when I was young and dumb. I grew up and grew respect for women, stayed
faithful and was honest, yet no woman wants that anymore. I've seriously had a
girl leave me because, word for word, "you're just too nice and sweet to
me." Not trying to really talk about personal history, just showing an
example to back up my point that times have changed, and marriage isn't what it
once was, along with everything else.
Jessie I never compared
homosexuality to bestiality. I simply stated if governmental marriage
recognition only requires the existence of love, then following that logic I
should be allowed to marry my dog, or Diet Coke if I do indeed love those
things. The government does not care about love. Why in your opinion does the
government even recognize marriage? To validate it's citizens? To make people
happy? I honestly am asking you.
Jessie Paul, please show me
scientific data that times are better now because of the changes in society's
views on sexual morality and marriage.
Liberal Andy Dogs and diet coke can't
be consenting adults, so obviously that's a very poor comparison. It doesn't
matter why the government recognizes marriage, but to think it's solely because
of procreation is absurd, there is procreation and abstinence from procreation
on both sides of marriage. At any rate, if marriage is afforded to one pair of
consenting adults, it should be afforded to any other pair of consenting
adults.
Jessie So I can marry my Mom?
Jessie Why does the government
recognize marriage in the first place?
Liberal Andy If that's what you're in
to I suppose. I'm not the person to decide what's moral and what's immoral.
Apparently you are.
Yankee
Conservative Jessie - congrats - u have out-secularized the secularists
using there own secular sources. Andy, I am yet to hear one rational counter of
the evidence. Rather, u are illogically bantering about inconsequential
nonsense. Like Jessie said, "love" have nothing to do with secular
marriage. Marriage is about procreation or the possibility thereof as well as
encouraging the statistically best societal structure, the nuclear family. Gays
are not banned from loving. Your right in one sense andy, times have changed -
we no longer chase them down with pitchforks! We are a very tolerant society,
and that is good for a diverse democracy. However, tolerance does not mean an
open endorsement. Same with any other union.
Yankee Conservative Andy, u are missing the
point. Morality has ZERO to do with the argument. NOTHING. You sound like your
spouting rhetoric and headlines you heard in the news like a child crying to be
heard in a noisy room. The argument is philisophical and statistical. Nothing
more.
Jessie Once again, please show
where I have made moral judgements.
Liberal Andy " Morality has ZERO
to do with the argument. NOTHING"
You're wrong. Hide behind as many absurd studies as you like, but this is a moral argument, and pretending it isn't is just incorrect. If you didn't have a personal disagreement with the concept of homosexuality this wouldn't even be a conversation.
You're wrong. Hide behind as many absurd studies as you like, but this is a moral argument, and pretending it isn't is just incorrect. If you didn't have a personal disagreement with the concept of homosexuality this wouldn't even be a conversation.
Yankee Conservative Absurd studies? So when
secular and scientifically accepted statistics are against youthey become
absurd? You're joking right? Have you ever written a HS level paper? It doesnt
work that way Andy. U actually need to refute those sources if you seek to
discredit them.
Liberal Andy No I don't. They're
irrelevant. And don't talk to me about writing high school level papers when
you can't even type out the word "you."
Jessie 129 studies are absurd?
Jessie How are they irrelevant?
Why does the government recognize marriage?
Liberal Andy Let me copy and paste a
comment I posted a few minutes ago on this thread:
"It doesn't matter why the government recognizes marriage, but to think it's solely because of procreation is absurd, there is procreation and abstinence from procreation on both sides of marriage. At any rate, if marriage is afforded to one pair of consenting adults, it should be afforded to any other pair of consenting adults."
"It doesn't matter why the government recognizes marriage, but to think it's solely because of procreation is absurd, there is procreation and abstinence from procreation on both sides of marriage. At any rate, if marriage is afforded to one pair of consenting adults, it should be afforded to any other pair of consenting adults."
Yankee Conservative Ouch. You corrected my
grammar. Aren't u quite the stickler for facts concrete definitions - except
when the definitions or studies go against U of course…
Jessie Who decides what marriage
is>
Yankee Conservative U are making morality an
issue - not I (or jessie for that matter)
Liberal Andy Not you.
Jessie I can walk into a
Catholic Church and be married by a priest yet never file for a marriage
license to have it recognized by the United States Government. Am I still or am
I not still married?
Jessie I can go to a rabbi and
be married yet never file for a marriage license to have it recognized by the
United States Government. Am I or am I not married?
Liberal Andy What in the world are you
getting at?
Liberal Paul I never said times were
better, yet no matter who people decide to marry we are still advancing through
life. Times are changing and people aren't going to deal with it anymore. Just
like medical marijuana, people are standing up for it and legalizing it. You know
the only reason it was made illegal was because it was taking away revenue from
the timber industry which was owned by the government. It wasn't outlawed
because of the high people got from it.
Jessie I can go to a courthouse
and get a marriage license from the government if I meet certain criteria put
forth by the government. Does that scenario make me more married than the other
two?
Yankee Conservative Change for the sake of
change is not progress.
Liberal Andy Change for the sake of
progress is
Jessie I am stating that
marriage is a dynamic institution that different societies, religions, and
governments have assigned meaning to. The United States has chosen not to
recognize or subsidize a marriage that will not benefit it.
Jessie What is progress?
Liberal Andy Do you want me to google
it for you?
Jessie I know what it means in
the general sense, yet different people may assign different meaning to the
word. Who gets to decide if a change creates progress or not?
Liberal Andy Hopefully secularists
Yankee Conservative Well you mentioned an
abstract term without defining it - once again, stop reading headlines! Dig a
bit and explore your notions
Liberal Andy You mentioned the term
progress, actually.
Jessie And why is that? What
makes secularism more valid than other beliefs? Secularist governments are
responsible for the deaths of millions.
Jessie Why are you trying to
control me with your beliefs?
Liberal Andy How am I trying to control
you?
Jessie Well you are stating that
the secularist religion gets to define progress- that is whether something has
worth or not. That is controlling.
Liberal Andy No, I didn't state that
it gets to. I just said I hope it does.
Liberal Andy And why is that? What makes
secularism more superior?
Yankee Conservative My definitions of
"progress" is the advancement of the human condition. Change for the
sake of change does not accomplish this as history has shown us.
Actually you are. You are forcing recognition of what you are calling "secular" doctrine (although its hardly secular since its not grounded in fact)
Actually you are. You are forcing recognition of what you are calling "secular" doctrine (although its hardly secular since its not grounded in fact)
Jessie Secularism is a religious
school of thought completely divorced from logic and based in emotion and
hedonism.
Liberal Paul "I am stating that
marriage is a dynamic institution that different societies, religions, and
governments have assigned meaning to."
Hence "societies", as in we the people. Well, "we the people" of this society have decided there needs to be change.
Hence "societies", as in we the people. Well, "we the people" of this society have decided there needs to be change.
Liberal Andy "Secularism is a
religious school of thought"
...can't argue with that level of blatant ignorance.
...can't argue with that level of blatant ignorance.
Jessie Is that why the over half
of the states have voted against it? Once again, facts are your friends.
Jessie re·li·gion
[ri-lij-uhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
[ri-lij-uhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
Yankee Conservative What is a religion - it
is a philosophy. Secularism - also a philosophy. Both are philosophies. Both
are religion. Deal with it. Why are we talking about religion again? does this
goof ball get it.
Yankee Conservative Every popular vote has
voted down gay marriage. Just saying Paul...
Liberal Andy Secularism is not a
philosophy, it's just an absence of religion.
Jessie sec·u·lar·ism
[sek-yuh-luh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
secular spirit or tendency, especially a system of political or social PHILOSOPHY that rejects all forms of religious faith and worship.
[sek-yuh-luh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
secular spirit or tendency, especially a system of political or social PHILOSOPHY that rejects all forms of religious faith and worship.
Jessie :)
Liberal Paul One problem, not everyone
votes. Most people think that their vote won't count. Then again, a lot of
people just don't care if they get married or not, so they don't care about
voting on it. Take all the people that don't vote, but don't care if these
homos get married, and I bet you the next thing we know we will be having
married homosexuals all across the country. Most people just really don't give
a damn about voting.
Yankee Conservative THe absense thereof is a
philosophy! My Gosh man!
phi·los·o·phy/fəˈläsÉ™fÄ“/
Noun:
1.The study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, esp. when considered as an academic discipline
phi·los·o·phy/fəˈläsÉ™fÄ“/
Noun:
1.The study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, esp. when considered as an academic discipline
Jessie If people choose not to
participate in a representative democracy via voting then they have no right to
speak about the policies of said democracy. Yes, we should make legislation
based on all the people who didn't care enough to make their voice heard.
Liberal Andy Secularism has nothing to
do with philosophy. It's just an absence of religion. I feel like I'm repeating
myself
Yankee Conservative If they dont care, then
they dont mind its absense either. Ur argument is invalid
Jessie Secularism is a
philosophy.
Jessie I feel like you need to
read a dictionary.
Liberal Andy This is a practical joke,
I'm sure of it
Yankee Conservative I knew it! Ur just
messing with us andy!
Jessie Man, you had us going, I
really thought that you were serious with all your Ad-Hom attacks, circular
logic, and rejection of facts!
Liberal Andy Explain to me how simply
not considering religion could be a philosophy? Secularism isn't a school of
thought, it's just the absence of a bias. Atheism isn't a group, therefore
can't be responsible for bad governments.
Jessie It is a philosophy built
off the premise of rejecting Theism
Jessie Secularism is a bias.
Yankee Conservative because webster said so.
Do secular notion guide your thought process? By definition, that guiding is a
philisophical notion. And thereby philosophy. And since u seem to have faith in
those secularist headlines, thats religion
Yankee Conservative *notions
Jessie But don't you know matt,
the only truth is that there is no truth, except for the truths secularists
preach.
Liberal Andy Secularism simply
requires a valid scientific basis for information. Anything else is irrelevant.
Rejecting a viewpoint that has no scientific value isn't a philosophy, it's
just ignoring noise.
Jessie Then why do you
continually reject facts that don't mesh with your worldview?
Jessie Matt, Andy R. is the
pastor of the Fundamentalist Church of Secularism and he decides what is truth
and not truth, duhhhhh
Yankee Conservative What....once
again...referr to the source list. Your joking right? You have all the facts
above you in the posts. Reject them instead of ranting like a child! Seriously
man!
Yankee Conservative Jessie - this is so worth
my time. THis is hillarious!
LIBERAL ANDY Because
even if the things you posted are fact, they're irrelevant.
Jessie Why?
Liberal Andy And I think it's funny
that you two are complaining of ad-hom attacks
Yankee Conservative Why are statistics and scientific
studies irrelevant? Once again - if they suck, tell us why and how. Cite your sources
to back up whatever claim you are trying to make (which is pretty much lost at
this point)
Yankee Conservative Not me - I welcome comments
about your stupidity
Liberal Andy I don't need to refute
them, they don't matter. True or otherwise.
Yankee Conservative But you said
"Secularism simply requires a valid scientific basis for information.
Anything else is irrelevant."
So it is relevant. Facts always are - even you admit it
So it is relevant. Facts always are - even you admit it
Yankee Conservative Explain yourself
Jessie .....and people like
Andy R are why gay marriage will never be legal in America. They make no
rational or logical claim as to why, they only rely on emotions.
Liberal Paul they don't mind its
absence, but if they were to vote, they would vote yet. When you were young and
you asked your parents if you could hang out with your friends, if they said
that they didn't care, then that meant yes you could. If you asks someone that
doesn't care about gay marriage if they think it should be legal or illegal
they will all say the same thing, "I don't care if they get married, I'm
not the one that's gay."
Liberal Andy Fact's aren't always
relevant. Irrelevant facts are irrelevant. No fact you can come up with
justifies denying a basic human liberty to a group of people based on sexual
orientation.
Jessie Please show me where in
the Constitution marriage is defined as a liberty.
Jessie Please show me scientific
facts that prove marriage is a liberty.
Yankee Conservative Paul - irrelevent. Show
me a statistic to back up your claims and why gay marriage is a good beneficial
idea and equal to hetero-marriage
Andy, so just the facts u like are relevant? Are you kidding?
Andy, so just the facts u like are relevant? Are you kidding?
Liberal Andy Just the relevant facts
are relevant. Jessie, this is where we have to stop pretending this isn't a
moral issue. It is a moral issue. Marriage is a basic human liberty.
Yankee Conservative Andy, stop trying to fill
some deep emotional void in your life with some invented crusade for a
"good cause". Facts cannot be denied. This is real life. deal with it
Jessie Why is marriage a basic
human liberty?
Jessie Really to get at the
issue- why is government acknowledgement of marriage a human issue?
Yankee Conservative And what relevent facts?
I AM YET TO SEE ANY OTHER THAN YOUR REGURGITATION OF BOAS HEADLINES
Yankee Conservative *BIAS
Yankee Conservative How can you state
something is a moral issue if you reject anything but scientific evidence?
Liberal Andy As long as we're talking
about "real life" and "filling emotional voids," Matt, you
might want to read "The God Delusion."
Liberal
Andy Who
are you to say marriage isn't a basic human liberty?
Jessie
I
see we have a Richard Dawkins groupie in the house. S
Liberal
Paul Why
is it equal? Because they are human being and have the same damn right I do.
Who cares if it's beneficial. It makes them happy and isn't hurting me, so let
them fuck each other in the ass, I'm not a part of it. Get your head out of
your ass and realize that people have EQUAL rights. Just because they don't
like the same things as me or you doesn't mean a damn thing, they're still
human being.
Jessie
Paul,
all humans have the right to marry a non direct relative of the opposite sex.
Me and a lesbian are equal. We both have the exact same right.
Yankee
Conservative I
am not stopping them Paul.
Liberal
Andy Wrong,
you have the right to marry who you want.
Jessie
Murder
makes me happy so it shouldn't be a crime
Liberal
Andy Murder
isn't victimless
Liberal
Andy And
that sounds like a moral justification
Yankee
Conservative Oedipus
? ever hear of him? Should I be able to marry and procreate with my mom?
Liberal
Paul To
marry whoever you want. It's not inside of your bedroom, so why hate on there
life style so much?
Liberal
Andy Yeah,
if you want to. Not my place to say that's immoral.
Jessie
Andy-
do I? How are you to know my sexuality? I can marry another women; but it
cannot be recognized by the government. How does government recognition change
something?
Liberal
Andy If
it doesn't, then why do you care?
Yankee
Conservative Paul.
I dont.
Jessie
Paul,
no moral judgements have been made on the homosexual lifestyle. It is illogical
for a government to recognize and subsidize something that does not benefit
society.
Yankee
Conservative Why
do u care?
Liberal
Andy And
your facebook page says "interested in men"
Yankee
Conservative Why
do u care, Andy? If it doesnt matter why do u care?
Liberal
AndyI
never said it didn't matter.
Jessie
I
care because I find it intellectually bankrupt and ridiculous to allow 2% of
society have special privileges and be subsidized by the government without
contributing to society.
Liberal
Andy What
makes you think that gay people will be subsidized for children they don't
have?
Yankee
Conservative Government
doesnt exist to make u feel fuzzy
Liberal
Paul How
does it not benefit society? It shuts them up, makes them happy, and doesn't
effect me nor you. A happy society makes for a better society. If the citizens
are happy, then life moves forward.
Yankee
Conservative They
will get joint tax among many other benefits. Ever read the tax code? I studied
it!
Yankee Conservative *joint tax deductions
Andy
What
does a joint tax deduction have to do with procreation?
Yankee
Conservative THey
can be happy without asking to be subsidized, Paul.
Yankee
Conservative U
asked about how they are subsidized Andy.
Jessie
Andy-
please do some research on state and national government. When one is granted a
marriage license they are automatically rewarded with 3,000+ benefits
regardless of if they have children. As I've told you multiple times these
benefits were originally designed to reward people for marrying and creating
the best atmosphere for raising the next generation of society.
Yankee
Conservative Can
u not follow your own conversation or was a rational response not in your
secular sound bites?
Jessie
Paul-
have you ever heard of our national deficit?
Liberal
Andy So
should infertile people not be allowed to be married?
Jessie
Irrelevant
by nature of biology the possibility is always there. When one is homosexual
the possibility is impossible. Scientific fact.
Andy
It's
not irrelevant. Why shouldn't people have to have fertility tests before
marriage?
Jessie
Right
to privacy
Yankee
Conservative I
know a woman who finally concieved a few kids after 15 years of trying! It was
a miracle.
Jessie
Also,
the human body works in ways that science can not always explain. By the way
that woman was my Mom.
Liberal
Paul So
what if they get a joint tax deduction? Like all of our tax dollars even go towards
what the government says they do? HA!!!! Atleast they're still working and
paying taxes instead of living off unemployment. I don't care that they have
tax deductions, I just don't want to support lazy people that refuse to work.
Liberal
Andy Actually
science can *always* explain how the body works.
Yankee
Conservative Plus
they make good adoptive homes. Statistics show that children need a good stable
home with a mom and dad. They can provide that for countless foster kids and
orphans
Jessie
And
why don't you want to support people who won't work?
Yankee
Conservative U
mean the science you reject andy?
Liberal
Andy Wow
Liberal
Paul Plus,
we could use more homosexual couples, this planet is over populated as it is.
At least with homosexuals there isn't unplanned parenthood and them giving kids
up for adoption.
Jessie
1.
overpopulation has been widely debunked. The entire world's population could
fit into texas. 2. Homosexuals still have sex with heterosexuals. The average
lesbian has 6 male sex partners a year, 50 in her entire lifetime. See 129
studies above.
Yankee
Conservative Overpopulated?
Europe will loose 50% of its workforce by 2050 and the USA isnt far behind. The
western world is in a population crisis! (Not that this has anything to do with
anything)
Liberal
Andy Alright,
clearly we're just saying things now. Did you know that every time a gay couple
kisses, a baby is born with a smile on it's face?
Jessie Please cite your
information. thanks.
Jessie
I've
provided 129 sources Andy. 1-2-9. You have provided 0.
Liberal
Andy Did
you know that Barrack Obama is literally Hitler?
Liberal
Paul I
don't want to support people who won't work because I don't condone lazyness.
Lazyness is not a disease, so they can get up off of their ass and work. If I
can get a job, anyone can.
Jessie
So
you're saying people should not receive benefits from society unless they
contribute to it?
Yankee
Conservative Here
u go Paul:
http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/aug2010/bw20100812_825983.htm
http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/aug2010/bw20100812_825983.htm
Liberal
Andy Paul,
you can't argue with intolerance. It's just impossible.
Jessie
Facts
Andy doesn't like = intolerance.
Yankee
Conservative Especially
when you have the FACTS on your side, right Andy?
Liberal
Andy Facts
can't justify intolerance.
Yankee Conservative WHo is the only person
here who insulted religion disrespectfully? Andy - ur the only bigot here. And
probably a white supremecist
Jessie
How
is a government choosing not to subsidize gay marriage intolerance? Please
explain. You haven't been able to at all.
Jessie
Andy,
you are trying to create a right that has never existed
Yankee
Conservative They
cant explain nothing. They do what feels good now. Never thinking past there
gut.
Yankee
Conservative (yes,
i used a double negative)
Jessie
...and
that's what we call Blind Faith.
Liberal
Paul Damn,
50 different partners?!?! I don't even know that many straight females that get
around that much!!!! Last time I checked, when someone sleeps with members of
both sexes, that was called bi, which usually leans more towards the opposite
sex and marries the opposite sex on most occasions.
Jessie
Paul,
please refer to the studies cited above. Thank you.
Liberal
Andy I'm
not even going to ask what logical rollercoaster you rode to come to the
conclusion that I'm a white supremacist. And why should I respect religion?
Liberal
Andy I
have no reason to respect religion at all
Jessie Why should you not? Why
are u the deciding factor of morality?
Yankee
Conservative I
am kidding Andy. I used ur logic. Which is nothing.
Yankee
Conservative Andy
- ur stament is innately bigoted. At least ur honest about your hatred
Jessie
Andy-
he used Reduction to Absurdity which is a type of philosophical argumentation
Lieral
Andy I
need a reason to respect something, not a reason not to.
Liberal
Paul Yeah.
But homosexuals still benefit to it as long as they work. They pay taxes,
unlike people on welfare that just have another child when their welfare is
about to run out.
Yankee
Conservative U
have no facts. What r u even talking about? Stop giving us random sound bites
Yankee
Conservative Welfare
is irrelevent. U think gays dont go on unemployment?
Liberal
Andy Fact
is, you're intolerant.
Yankee
Conservative No
- actually u are. U just told us u were when u commented on religion
Yankee
Conservative How
old r u guys? HS? Middle School?
Jessie: Paul, the idea of giving a homosexual marital benefits when they are physically
incapable of providing a next generation (the reason why those benefits were
created) is logically identical to not wanting to provide welfare to people who
don't contribute to society. No contribution = no government benefit.
Liberal
Andy I'm
not intolerant of religion, I just don't respect it.
Liberal
Andy Blacks
and women are people, therefore are inherently deserving of respect.
Jessie
Im
not intolerant of blacks I just don't respect them" "Im not
intolerant of women, I just dont respect them" Sounds pretty intolerant
eh?
Liberal
Andy Religion
is not a person, it's an fairy tale.
Jessie
Religion
is composed of humans therefore inherently deserving of respect
Yankee
Conservative ^intolerent
[andy]
Jessie
Andy
that statement is intolerant
Jessie
Gay
marriage does not exist, its just a fairy tale
Liberal
Andy So
you respect scientology as an ideal? Why?
Liberal
Andy I
didn't say I don't respect religious people, I said I don't respect religion.
Liberal
Andy As
an ideology.
Jessie
Circular
logic.
Liberal
Andy You
can't just say that every time you're wrong, you know
Jessie
I'm
not intolerant of gay people I just don't accept gay marriage as an ideology
Liberal
Andy Gay
marriage isn't an ideology
Jessie
Why
not?
Yankee
ConservativeAndy...u
have not debunked any of our claims. U are wrong
Jessie
Andy
you are deflecting. If you'd like to debate religion save that for another
time.
Liberal
Paul If
they pay tax dollars then they still contribute. And good for you, you act like
you're the only one that works in the morning. Guess again though buddy.
Jessie
But
they do not contribute to society in the way that a person having a child and
raising them in a stable environment does, therefore they should not be given
the same benefit that person is given. DUH!
Liberal
Andy You
said it was intolerant of me not to respect religion. I just want to know why I
should respect it?
Jessie
You
are deflecting. I don't care what you think about religion since it has zero to
do with gay marriage.
Liberal
Andy not
true
Jessie
yawn...
Liberal
Paul Not
all married couples have children, so then why do they still get tax
deductions?
Liberal
Andy yeah
paul, they do. Now lets like all of each other's comments and go to bed.
Jessie
The
vast majority do. It is understood within our society that people have children
within marriage. As I've told you multiple times there will always be outliers.
Yankee
Conservative People
used to have more - not our fault many do not value large families like they
used too. Nonetheless, children and every one of them is a great benefit
Jessie
Andy-
we have provided an argument based in fact as to why the government should not
subsidize gay marriage. You cannot refute it so you go back to the
religion/intolerance argument instead of providing fact.Your argument is based
in emotional appeals. Emotions are nice, but we don't base our laws off
emotions.
Liberal
Paul But
shouldn't only the married couples with children get the tax deductions? Where
is the justice in that if homos can't get married because of the reason that
they can't carry children?
Liberal
Andy Because
without religion, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Gay marriage would
just be "marriage."
Jessie
Once
again. Science. Homosexuals are physically incapable of creating children,
nothing will ever change that.
Yankee
Conservative Andy,
your right. If secularists werent so intolerent of religion this crusade for
the 2% would not exist
Yankee
Conservative They
turned this into a religious thing (which its not) as seen by your sound bies
Yankee
Conservative *bites
Jessie
Andy-
until you can provide facts to back that up your premise is irrelevant. Once
again as I told you when you privately messaged me, the atheist, secularist
Prime Minister of Australia is radically opposed to gay marriage for the exact
reasons we have stated.
Liberal
Andy It
is a religiose thing no matter how many times you say it isn't.
Liberal
Andy religious*
Jessie
That
is your opinion , and will stay an opinion until you can back it up with
scientific fact.
Jessie
Follow
your own secularist logic bro.
Yankee
Conservative guess
the Australian example doesnt matter either huh?
Yankee
Conservative lmao
- Epic. Gnite folks
Jessie
Facts
are not the secularist's friends. They love emotion and fallacies.
Liberal
Andy You
know it's a fact. If there was no such thing as religion, gay marriage would be
a non-issue.
Yankee Conservative ...said the
Australians...
Yankee
Conservative U
have no facts Andy - nothing concerte that u even admitted your secular faith
is based upon. U have nothing but a fuzzy feeling until you have facts and
logic behind your assertions.
Jessie
Andy
please provide me with scientific fact to prove it
Liberal
Andy Tell
you what: lets come back to this in twenty years, and see who history views as
the bigots.
Liberal Andy How about that?
Liberal
Paul Well
then why don't we just make marriage illegal for anyone that doesn't have a
child. If love nor religion have anything to do with marriage, then society
should be accepting of this, correct?
Yankee
Conservative Thats
what the Polygamists said when they were outlawed.
Jessie
Because
Paul the United States have chosen to define marriage as between one man and
one woman for the numerous reasons we have stated. You can define marriage
however you like but don't expect the government to subsidize it.
Liberal
Andy …which
has nothing to do with anything. Like I said, I'll save this convo, and in
twenty years, or maybe even ten, we'll see this through the lens of history,
and I think you'll both be surprised... and hopefully ashamed.
Liberal
Andy Goodnight
Yankee
Conservative Maybe
when u get out in the real world and become knowledgeable U will see the error
of ur ways. I shall save too. I look forward to our date
Jessie
In
10-20 years radical secularists will abort and contracept themselves out of existence.
Its called Natural Selection and sadly the secularists are losing :'(
