APP - Homosexuality Now, Pedophilia Next

Southern Man said:
You tried both these arguments before. SCOTUS made mistakes before, racist ones.
Click to expand...

the arguments are still valid and will show fruition....

just as scotus overturned the racist marriage ban, so will it overturn this sexual preference ban....

there is no longer any state interest in denying homosexuals the right to marry.....
 
Yurt said:
the arguments are still valid and will show fruition....

just as scotus overturned the racist marriage ban, so will it overturn this sexual preference ban....

there is no longer any state interest in denying homosexuals the right to marry.....
Click to expand...

I agree, Yurt. And it will happen.

And the best part is, in 20 years, most people will view those opposing homosexual marriage now in the same way we view the racists who opposed the civil rights movement.
 
Yurt said:
the arguments are still valid and will show fruition....

just as scotus overturned the racist marriage ban, so will it overturn this sexual preference ban....

there is no longer any state interest in denying homosexuals the right to marry.....
Click to expand...

Sounds like a queer enablers prayer...
 
Southern Man said:
Back to the OP, how long will it be until we have, say, 48% of Maine endorsing pedophilia?
Click to expand...

I would say never. I am betting that most people in Maine can see the difference between two consenting adults and a child molester.
 
lmao....so allowing them to marry is going to ENABLE them....

yeah...because not being able to marry has really put a cork in that

:palm:

and homosexuality and pedophilia do not have anything to do with other....pedophilia is ILLEGAL....homosexuality is LEGAL....

the only difference when they are allowed to marry is the fact they are married....they can engage in homosexual BEHAVIOR now....marriage isn't going to change a damn thing....

wake up
 
Yurt said:
lmao....so allowing them to marry is going to ENABLE them....

yeah...because not being able to marry has really put a cork in that

:palm:

and homosexuality and pedophilia do not have anything to do with other....pedophilia is ILLEGAL....homosexuality is LEGAL....

the only difference when they are allowed to marry is the fact they are married....they can engage in homosexual BEHAVIOR now....marriage isn't going to change a damn thing....

wake up
Click to expand...

Sodomy used to be illegal as well. Look what that did.
 
Southern Man said:
Sodomy used to be illegal as well. Look what that did.
Click to expand...

Yes, it used to be illegal. Of course, the enforcement of the law was aimed almost exclusively at homosexuals.

You say "Look what that did".

Tell us what it did? I don't see society harmed one little bit by making it legal. Talk about gov't interference in private lives. The gov't has no business telling consenting adults what they can or cannot do in the privacy of their own homes.

But you, while crying about gov't interference in business, then seem to be saying that the sodomy laws shouldn't have been repealed.

Tell us what harm it has done, SM.
 
Southern Man said:
Sodomy used to be illegal as well. Look what that did.
Click to expand...

lol...irrelevent....

perhaps you want slavery legal again too :rolleyes:

hypocritical for you want the goverment out of private business affairs, yet you want the government into one of the most private sanctuary's this country has....the bedroom and marriage
 
Yurt said:
the arguments are still valid and will show fruition....

just as scotus overturned the racist marriage ban, so will it overturn this sexual preference ban....

there is no longer any state interest in denying homosexuals the right to marry.....
Click to expand...

Uhm... do you live under a rock? 31 states so far, have REJECTED Gay Marriage. The only way you can rationalize that no state is interested in denying homosexuals the right to marry, is maybe because they already did it, and don't see the point in doing it again!

And let's clarify once again... NO STATE has EVER denied homosexuals the right to marry! They have the same exact right to marry as everyone else! They don't have the right to join in a homosexual partnership and call it marriage, but they DO have the right to marry.

I will tell you once again, if the SCOTUS ever does rule Gay Marriage into law, the American people will resoundingly ratify a Constitutional Amendment to protect traditional marriage. The way I see it, you can have Civil Unions, or you can have a Constitutional Amendment Protecting Traditional Marriage... those are your two choices, and Gay Marriage is not one of them.
 
Dixie said:
Gay already have all the same privileges that everyone else has! I can't marry someone of my same gender, just the same as gays! Gays can marry someone of the opposite gender, just the same as me! No one is being denied something that others get, the same standard applies across the board. What we don't have, is marriage based on sexually deviant behavior.



I don't want to change the definition of marriage for everyone. I explained very carefully what I wanted to do, can't you read?



I didn't bring religion into the mix, that happened in the mid 1500's. And this has nothing to do with the New Testament decrying homosexuality. Why do you have to keep jumping around, claiming I am making this about other things, when I have been very clear about what my position is? I offered a viable solution, one that I think addresses all the problems, and gives all sides what they want in the end. You reject it, because it doesn't hurl feces in the face of religion, and THAT is what you seek to do! THAT is what this is all about, you don't really give two shits about gay people.



No, I don't keep referring to deviant sex, you are the one trying to redefine marriage based on deviant sex, and I am the one opposed to it. Instead of calling it Gay Marriage, we should refer to it as Sexually Deviant Marriage! I am not okay with sexually deviant marriage. I think marriage should NOT be defined by sexual behavior, you think marriage should be.

I am not losing myself on anything, moron. So far, I am the only one who has proposed a compromise SOLUTION to this problem, and you are the one who continues to IGNORE the will of the people, IGNORE everything I have pointed out, and continue to insist on ramming something down our throats, because you are too intolerant and bigoted to see things any other way. You are relegated to insulting me, and trying to twist my argument into things I never stated, or compare it to things that can't be compared. Like I said before, if your "side" continues to force feed this shit to society, America WILL pass a constitutional amendment, and the issue will be dead forever... no civil unions, no gay marriage, no nothing, except an amendment which forever protects the sanctity of traditional marriage in America. IS that what you ultimately want? Because that is precisely what happens when courts and activists try to force something on the people they are vehemently opposed to.
Click to expand...


So now you're back to the "sexual deviant behavior", that you said had no bearing on your "rant-du-jour"!!

But in your previous complaint, you spoke of religion; but yet, you can't support your angst with anything.

Untru.
You think that marriage should be denied because of your opinion of what is deviant and what isn't.
Are you saying that couples that enjage in oral or anal sex, are deviant??

As to your constant proclamation of a Constitutional Amendment, you should keep beleiving in that; but just make sure that you don't have anything around that you can hurt yourself with.
That was; when you realize that you've failed, you won't feel obligated to harm yourself.

Don't worry, Dixie.
No one's going to foce you to marry a homosexual.
 
Southern Man said:
Why is the age of the participants an issue while their sex is not? Next you'll want to allow folks to marry animals, or objects. Or retards. :)
Click to expand...

I finally figured it out.
You're scared shitless!! :good4u:

By the way, are you suggesting that people with a mental disablity aren't allowed to be married?? :palm:
 
Dixie said:
Uhm... do you live under a rock? 31 states so far, have REJECTED Gay Marriage. The only way you can rationalize that no state is interested in denying homosexuals the right to marry, is maybe because they already did it, and don't see the point in doing it again!

And let's clarify once again... NO STATE has EVER denied homosexuals the right to marry! They have the same exact right to marry as everyone else! They don't have the right to join in a homosexual partnership and call it marriage, but they DO have the right to marry.

I will tell you once again, if the SCOTUS ever does rule Gay Marriage into law, the American people will resoundingly ratify a Constitutional Amendment to protect traditional marriage. The way I see it, you can have Civil Unions, or you can have a Constitutional Amendment Protecting Traditional Marriage... those are your two choices, and Gay Marriage is not one of them.
Click to expand...

you obviously have no clue what the strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny test is, else you would not have made your silly comment about amending constitutions....

they are in fact denied the right to marry....it is the height of fucking ignorance to claim they can marry, they just have to marry someone they don't love....are you really this fucking stupid? that is like telling you that you can't marry a black person, but you can marry anyone else, we are not denying you the right to marry, JUST NOT WHO YOU WANT.....

idiot
 
Yurt said:
you obviously have no clue what the strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny test is, else you would not have made your silly comment about amending constitutions....

they are in fact denied the right to marry....it is the height of fucking ignorance to claim they can marry, they just have to marry someone they don't love....are you really this fucking stupid? that is like telling you that you can't marry a black person, but you can marry anyone else, we are not denying you the right to marry, JUST NOT WHO YOU WANT.....

idiot
Click to expand...

No, it's not the same. If you told me I couldn't marry a black person, I would file a civil rights lawsuit and win, because you can't discriminate based on race, that is the law.

There is no strict or intermediate scrutiny regarding a Constitutional Amendment, it requires ratification by 3/4 of the states, and that is IT.... done... finished... end of story! It is not "scrutinized" either strictly or intermediately, if it is ratified by 3/4 of the sates, it becomes a part of the Constitution.

I can make the same argument you have made, for people who enjoy sex with animals. Sure, it's not legal at this time, but homosexuality is not legal in some parts of the world. This is a minor technicality, and one that could easily be resolved, particularly if the proponents of such a measure had the precedent of "gay marriage" to hold up. Who the fuck are YOU to deny someone the right to marry the DOG they love? Isn't THAT solely based on your own personal morals? Who are you to deny people to marry children? Isn't THAT based on your own personal morals? Aren't you simply discriminating against people who have a certain sexual preference?

Once you make marriage include homosexuals, every sexual deviant will have the constitutional right to equal protection under the law, that is about as clear as it can be. You can't prevent it, you won't be able to deny it, because you have established the precedent already. If you can't discriminate based on sexual behavior, you can't discriminate against ANY sexual behavior. What if the lifting of interracial marriage bans, merely applied to blacks and whites, and not to asians or other races? Wouldn't other races have had a legitimate complaint for lack of equality? The same is true with sexual deviant marriage... allow it, and you have to allow it for ALL sexual deviants.
 
Dixie said:
No, it's not the same. If you told me I couldn't marry a black person, I would file a civil rights lawsuit and win, because you can't discriminate based on race, that is the law.

There is no strict or intermediate scrutiny regarding a Constitutional Amendment, it requires ratification by 3/4 of the states, and that is IT.... done... finished... end of story! It is not "scrutinized" either strictly or intermediately, if it is ratified by 3/4 of the sates, it becomes a part of the Constitution.

I can make the same argument you have made, for people who enjoy sex with animals. Sure, it's not legal at this time, but homosexuality is not legal in some parts of the world. This is a minor technicality, and one that could easily be resolved, particularly if the proponents of such a measure had the precedent of "gay marriage" to hold up. Who the fuck are YOU to deny someone the right to marry the DOG they love? Isn't THAT solely based on your own personal morals? Who are you to deny people to marry children? Isn't THAT based on your own personal morals? Aren't you simply discriminating against people who have a certain sexual preference?

Once you make marriage include homosexuals, every sexual deviant will have the constitutional right to equal protection under the law, that is about as clear as it can be. You can't prevent it, you won't be able to deny it, because you have established the precedent already. If you can't discriminate based on sexual behavior, you can't discriminate against ANY sexual behavior. What if the lifting of interracial marriage bans, merely applied to blacks and whites, and not to asians or other races? Wouldn't other races have had a legitimate complaint for lack of equality? The same is true with sexual deviant marriage... allow it, and you have to allow it for ALL sexual deviants.
Click to expand...

You are truly delusional and the sad part, is that you actually think you're going to win on this issue. :good4u:

Don't be scared Dixie.
No one's going to make you marry a homosexual. :cof1:
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
You are truly delusional and the sad part, is that you actually think you're going to win on this issue. :good4u:

Don't be scared Dixie.
No one's going to make you marry a homosexual. :cof1:
Click to expand...

I don't think someone is going to make me marry a homosexual, why do you keep saying that like it is some kind of slap or insult? Do you think it is derogatory to insinuate someone would be homosexual? It's what it sounds like to me, you certainly do think that hurts my feelings or something, because you've repeated it four times in this thread. It wasn't funny the first time.

Again... for the umpteenth time, this is NOT about my personal preferences regarding sex, or anything else. I am not intolerant of homosexuals, I have a good many homosexual friends and colleagues. I articulated a well-thought-out solution for this issue, and it is very considerate of homosexual couples and what they claim to want, so for you to keep trying to portray me as some kind of intolerant bigot, is laughable, as well as completely dishonest.

This is also not about me winning or losing. 80% (or more) of America, is not in favor of Gay Marriage. Even your beloved Messiah President is not supportive of Gay Marriage! Initiatives on Gay Marriage have FAILED at the ballot box 31 times, and have won at the ballot box... NEVER! 31 and 0 baby! That's how little Americans want Gay Marriage! Yet, here you are, trying to build up confidence I guess, by pretending the situation is just the opposite, that I am backing the small insignificant minority of people who don't want Gay Marriage.... that is laughable too!
 
Dixie said:
I don't think someone is going to make me marry a homosexual, why do you keep saying that like it is some kind of slap or insult? Do you think it is derogatory to insinuate someone would be homosexual? It's what it sounds like to me, you certainly do think that hurts my feelings or something, because you've repeated it four times in this thread. It wasn't funny the first time.

Again... for the umpteenth time, this is NOT about my personal preferences regarding sex, or anything else. I am not intolerant of homosexuals, I have a good many homosexual friends and colleagues. I articulated a well-thought-out solution for this issue, and it is very considerate of homosexual couples and what they claim to want, so for you to keep trying to portray me as some kind of intolerant bigot, is laughable, as well as completely dishonest.

This is also not about me winning or losing. 80% (or more) of America, is not in favor of Gay Marriage. Even your beloved Messiah President is not supportive of Gay Marriage! Initiatives on Gay Marriage have FAILED at the ballot box 31 times, and have won at the ballot box... NEVER! 31 and 0 baby! That's how little Americans want Gay Marriage! Yet, here you are, trying to build up confidence I guess, by pretending the situation is just the opposite, that I am backing the small insignificant minority of people who don't want Gay Marriage.... that is laughable too!
Click to expand...

I repeat it; because it appears that what you're truly afraid of. :eek:

I bet at one time you also said "Some of my best friends are Black". :good4u:

It took a while before the bigots could be convinced that inter-racial marriages weren't going to destroy society and once you get over your fear, you'll have to accept gays getting married also.

You might as well avoid the rush and get used to it, now. :cof1:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top