W
WinterBorn
Guest
Apparently you don't mind ignoring facts........and lying.
A Conservative Case for Gay Marriage - Promoting American Values
Apparently you don't mind ignoring facts........and lying.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
seriously SM....how does secular gay contractual marriage in america harm you or your family? as you support britney's right to do what she did, how can you not support two people of the same sex wanting the same contractual rights? i've seen you complain about promiscuity, well......marriage.....hello. and, as if there is no promiscuity in the non married or even married hetro population....
what they do and how they contract will not affect my marriage to my loving wife, and it just seems bizarre that your marriage or life would be affected by it
what they do and how they contract will not affect my marriage to my loving wife, and it just seems bizarre that your marriage or life would be affected by it
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Queer marriage doesn't affect my family or my marriage but affects these institutions as a whole.
Marriage itself doesn't stop promiscuity, and queers, especially gay men, tend to be the much more promiscuous than normal couples. Progressive culture has damaged marriage with promiscuity; queers would inflict still more damage.
W
WinterBorn
Guest
This is another nonsense argument. The promiscuity of single gay men has no bearing on the gay men in longer term relationships who are wanting to marry.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Straw man. No surprise there; you are the king of them.
W
WinterBorn
Guest
Your use of the strawman argument has gotten old.
You said, "Marriage itself doesn't stop promiscuity, and queers, especially gay men, tend to be the much more promiscuous than normal couples. Progressive culture has damaged marriage with promiscuity; queers would inflict still more damage.".
I did not exaggerate your claim. I argued that it was nonsense. You posted about all gay men when the discussion is about gay marriage. When discussing straight marriage, you do not include straight singles.
Also, this is another of your double standards. There is no legal penalty for promiscuity. There is a penalty in the divorce proceedings, but not with the promiscuity itself. But you want to prevent gays from marrying because of the promiscuity of gays in general, not specifically those in long term relationships.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
A Straw Man turns:
"...and queers, especially gay men, tend to be the much more promiscuous..."
into:
"The promiscuity of single gay men...".
"...and queers, especially gay men, tend to be the much more promiscuous..."
into:
"The promiscuity of single gay men...".
W
WinterBorn
Guest
It is a valid comment. You want to group all gay men into one category concerning promiscuity. That is dishonest at best.
The discussion is about marriage. Do you think that all gay men will want to marry and then continue their promiscuity?
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
That's what statistics does: it groups folks together. Gay men are still more promiscuous than normal folks regardless of their legal status.
W
WinterBorn
Guest
The promiscuity of gay men is only relevant in a discussion of gay marriage if you look at the gay men in long term relationships or in the rates of infidelity.
And even then, it is only relevant if you are going to deny marriage licences to straights who are promiscuous.
Your arguments have all failed.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Its entirely relevant, since gay men are still more promiscuous than normal folks regardless of their legal status.
W
WinterBorn
Guest
It is entirely irrelevant.
You are trying to make the case that the gay men's promiscuity will damage the institution of marriage. Unless there is some evidence that gay men in committed relationships are more promiscuous, the point you are trying to make has no bearing.
Also, since there is no punishment for promiscuity for straights, there cannot be a punishment for promiscuity for gays without admitting bias and bigotry.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
1. "Normal" is a mathematical concept;one per centers are clearly not within the normal range of behaviors.
2. Promiscuity harms marriage and families. That is a fact.
3. I assume you are referring to my use of the term "queers". It has been used by gay groups to describe themselves, and is less tiresome to write and read than the alternatives, such as "gays, lesbians, transvestites, transgenders..."; not meant to be derogatory but efficient.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Far higher rates of promiscuity are observed even within 'committed' gay relationships than in heterosexual marriage: In Holland, male homosexual relationships last, on average, 1.5 years, and gay men have an average of eight partners a year outside of their supposedly “committed” relationships. (Xiridou M, et al. The contribution of steady and casual partnerships to the incidence of HIV infection among homosexual men in Amsterdam. AIDS. 2003; 17: 1029-38.) Gay men have sex with someone other than their primary partner in 66% of relationships within the first year, rising to 90% of relationships after five years. (Harry J. Gay Couples. New York. 1984)
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0095.html
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
The Southern Man waits for the usual bashing of Catholics. 
W
WinterBorn
Guest
1. Normal behavior is not a prerequisite for marriage in the US. It is not now and never has been. It is used now by those who wish to maintain gays as second class citizens, but is irrelevant in this topic.
2. Promiscuity harms the marriage of those being promiscuous, if it is done as infidelity. Considering the rates of infidelity amoung straight married couples, it is not a valid reason for denying gays the right ro marry. Saying that one is more promiscuous is just differentiating by degrees.
W
WinterBorn
Guest
The Southern Man waits for the usual bashing of Catholics.
Catholics certainly provide plenty of ammunition for bashing. But since we are discussing laws in the US, and the US Constitution forbids making laws based solely on a single religion's dogma, catholics are irrelevant too.
1) Based on it being a mathematical concept, whats wrong with being abnormal, out of the range of a mathematical concept?
2) How does someone elses marriage affect mine? If my neighbor cheats on his wife it does not affect my marriage.
3) Its name calling, just like Ni**er, just some use it to refer to themselves does not make it right.
Calm down bro’, and don’t stress out about people who you don’t even know. I mean you actually went to the trouble of researching how much sex gay people are having. Bizarre.
My liberal brethren and I have always be mystified (and frankly kinda creeped out) at how movement conservatives can expend so much energy, and sometimes remain obsessed for years, about the sex lives of other people.