How To Explain Gay Rights To An Idiot

Rana said:
No, those are your own posts you are reading, Darla can chew you up and spit you out when it comes to serious debate, but like I told you before, she doesn't bother because you can't compute.
Click to expand...

That's the standard lefty lame excuse. That's what this place is for so why are you and Darla here? Looks to me like you're here for the social club gossip. Don't expect anyone to take you and Darla seriously when you post crap like you don't debate because of anything other than you're both ill equipped. That's why you spend more time reminiscing and gossiping.
 
Onceler said:
So, you're switching your whole argument on a dime, then? It was all about procreation, until you realized that lots of folks get married and don't have kids, or can't...so now it's about keeping things the way they've been for hundreds of years, just for the sake of the fact that it's been that way for hundreds of years?

Is this how non-progressives think about everything? Just keep it all the same, because everything has worked so well for hundreds of years?
Click to expand...

Not at all.....your mixing me up with others posters maybe?

Earliest marriages were instituted for the protection of children and mothers, among other things....thats already established.....and it has served us well since its inception....THERE IS NO PROBLEM TO FIX.

I never claimed everyone HAD to get married, its obvious they don't....


Exactly what is your problem ?......besides not following the thread and putting all posters into one bag.
 
Last edited:
Onceler said:
Or, they may just want visitation rights, and property rights, and the ability to celebrate & recognize their union with others. Stuff like that.
Click to expand...

You can get property rights with a lawyer. You can celebrate and recognize your union with others. No problem.

What the hell is "visitation rights"?
 
bravo said:
Not at all.....your mixing me up with others posters maybe?

Earliest marriages were instituted for the protection of children and mothers....thats already established.....and it has served us well since its inception....THERE IS NO PROBLEM TO FIX.

I never claimed everyone HAD to get married, its obvious they don't....


Exactly what is your problem ?......besides not following the thread and putting all posters into one bag.
Click to expand...

I don't even know where to begin on this one. How is that "already established?" By the one sentence you were able to find, that you didn't even link?

And, you were making the procreation argument, bravs. Did you forget? Have you jumped around so much on this topic that you're all dizzy?

As for lumping all posters into one bag, do you mean like saying the "left has latched onto 'sanctity of marriage'?"

Honestly, all I see on this thread is bigots like yourself riding a unicycle through one flaming hoop after another, desperately trying to find an argument that supports your willingness to deny homosexuals basic rights.
 
Rana said:
No, those are your own posts you are reading, Darla can chew you up and spit you out when it comes to serious debate, but like I told you before, she doesn't bother because you can't compute.
Click to expand...

I'll bet you think she can leap tall buildings with a single bound too.....

Darla the dipship can't make two or three posts without a personal attack of the poster.......
 
Alias said:
You can get property rights with a lawyer. You can celebrate and recognize your union with others. No problem.

What the hell is "visitation rights"?
Click to expand...

visitation rights are for minor children.

is homosexual behavior or relationships illegal in this country?
 
Onceler said:
I don't even know where to begin on this one. How is that "already established?" By the one sentence you were able to find, that you didn't even link?

And, you were making the procreation argument, bravs. Did you forget? Have you jumped around so much on this topic that you're all dizzy?

As for lumping all posters into one bag, do you mean like saying the "left has latched onto 'sanctity of marriage'?"

Honestly, all I see on this thread is bigots like yourself riding a unicycle through one flaming hoop after another, desperately trying to find an argument that supports your willingness to deny homosexuals basic rights.
Click to expand...

Earliest marriages were not to protect mothers and children, talk about rewriting all of history.
 
bravo said:
I'll bet you think she can leap tall buildings with a single bound too.....

Darla the dipship can't make two or three posts without a personal attack of the poster.......
Click to expand...

Aside from the irony of this sentence, you'd better watch that spelling, bravs...
 
Onceler said:
I don't even know where to begin on this one. How is that "already established?" By the one sentence you were able to find, that you didn't even link?

And, you were making the procreation argument, bravs. Did you forget? Have you jumped around so much on this topic that you're all dizzy?

As for lumping all posters into one bag, do you mean like saying the "left has latched onto 'sanctity of marriage'?"

Honestly, all I see on this thread is bigots like yourself riding a unicycle through one flaming hoop after another, desperately trying to find an argument that supports your willingness to deny homosexuals basic rights.
Click to expand...

'sanctity of marriage' ?....you never did grasp that phase did you ?......

You couldn't admit to the reason the institution of marriage was even created.....you came back with something about 'myth's' didn't you...?
You kept claiming something existed before we KNEW it existed.....
You're so fuckin' lame to debate.....but that was a funny about the unicycle....
 
bravo said:
'sanctity of marriage' ?....you never did grasp that phase did you ?......

You couldn't admit to the reason the institution of marriage was even created.....you came back with something about 'myth's' didn't you...?
You kept claiming something existed before we KNEW it existed.....
You're so fuckin' lame to debate.....but that was a funny about the unicycle....
Click to expand...

That's an interesting take. I was referencing what anthropologists who actually study this stuff had concluded, and what they based their conclusions on.

As opposed to...well, what is it that you're basing your idiocy on, again?
 
Onceler said:
That's an interesting take. I was referencing what anthropologists who actually study this stuff had concluded, and what they based their conclusions on.

As opposed to...well, what is it that you're basing your idiocy on, again?
Click to expand...


what anthropologists ?....enlighten me with a link about what anthropologists says about the institution....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top