Reality: Homosexual Marriage
- Thread starter Cancel 2018. 3
- Start date
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
by requiring us to treat that which we consider abnormal to be the equivalent of normal......(I know I've repeated it a lot of times, but I decided to do it once more just for giggles)......can you give me an example of a state that requires us to treat your earlier examples, such as spouse abuse or child abuse, as normal?.....I am not aware of any.....
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
/shrugs....do what you want, just don't pass laws that require me to pay attention to you....once you do, the "normal/abnormal" argument makes sense....I see it as a direct parallel to abortion.....we have two generations of people now who have grown up thinking it is normal to kill your unborn children....why should we have two generations grow up thinking "marriage" between two men is normal?.....simply because some oddballs on the left want us to?.....
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
At one time, people thought that treating Blacks like humans was abnormal.
At one time, people thought that letting woman vote was abnormal.
At one time, people thought that interacial marriages were abnormal.
At one time, beating your wife was accepted and normal.
At one time, chilld marriages was accepted and normal.
At one tme, forcing your wife to submit sexually was accepted and normal.
There are any number of things that were considered either normal or abnormal and were changed.
Suprisingly society survived and so did the idea of marriage.
Same sex marriages will be allowed, within your life time.
Southern Chicken
Verified User
Well I could give you one where interracial marriages were not considered normal until the law was changed. http://http://www.eugenics-watch.com/roots/chap07.html
QUOTE: For example, Virginia's Racial Integrity Act of 1924 made it "unlawful for any white person in this state to marry any save a white person, or a person with no other admixture of blood than white and American Indian." In writing the statute, one of the challenges that the Virginia racists faced was their own proud history. According to a publication from the Registrar of the State Bureau of Vital Statistics, the law had to take account of "the desire of all to recognize as an integral and honored part of the white race the descendants of John Rolfe and Pocahontas." Because of the Pocahontas loophole, you could have a little Indian blood (one great-great-grandparent) and still be counted as white. But "every person in whom there is ascertainable any negro blood shall be deemed and taken to be a colored person."
The law automatically voided all marriages between whites and blacks. The law prohibited leaving the state to get married and then returning, and specified that the "fact of their cohabitation here as man and wife shall be evidence of their marriage." The penalty was stiff: "If any white person intermarry with a colored person, or any colored person intermarry with a white person, he shall be guilty of a felony and shall be punished by confinement in the penitentiary for not less than one nor more than five years."
Virginia judges continued to defend anti-miscegenation laws for decades. In 1955, the State Supreme Court of Appeals decided that the laws served legitimate purposes, including: "to preserve the racial integrity of its citizens," and to prevent "the corruption of blood," "a mongrel breed of citizens," and "the obliteration of racial pride."
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
Last edited:
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
You keep forgetting that one little thing and it's beginning to look like it's because you can't argue it.
That one little thing is called ADULT CONSENT.
Children can't give consent and you can't "molest" someone who has CONSENTED to be touched.
You are really setting the bar, really low, for what describes a moron; but I'm still not sure anyone could ever achieve the moronic level you have.
If nothing else, you are amusing.
As I have pointed out several times now, "adult consent" is something WE MADE! There is no magical event that happens when a person reaches 18 years of age, which suddenly enables them to know and understand "consent" or the consequences of their actions. It is an artificial parameter we established, nothing more. If we can "redefine" marriage, can't we also "redefine" age of consent? I think we can!
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
This is kind of scary Dixie; because it's beginning to appear that your actual agenda is to eliminate the "age of consent" so that you can legally have sexual relationships with children.
Very scary Dixie.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Right....and it's called "marriage" in "legal and clinical" documents, because that is what we call the union of one man and one woman in America! Anything else, is NOT marriage!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
This is kind of scary Dixie; because it's beginning to appear that your actual agenda is to eliminate the "age of consent" so that you can legally have sexual relationships with children.
Very scary Dixie.
Well you can think what you want to retard, you are a fuckwit who can't comprehend basic English, so it doesn't surprise me you'd interpret my point that way. It's not what I said, it's not what I argued, but if it makes you feel better about getting your ass handed to you, then go for it! Names don't bother me a bit.
No one is requiring you to treat it as normal. You can still expect that most people are heterosexual. I do.
YOU KEEP CHANGING CONTEXT. What you really mean is you think you are required to consider it moral. You are not. For the 100th time, nobody gives a shit what you think. Do people come to your house and ask you to bless their marriages or something?
Now please tell me how you are damaged by this supposed command to consider it moral? Are you required to consider other marriages that you deem immoral to be moral? How does that affect you and why doesn't the law protect you?
I did not give any such examples. My examples of abnormal were left handed and red headed. I pointed out many pages back that interracial marraige is abnormal. In what state are you allowed to deny those abnormal people the right to marry? Are you required to consider redheads normal by allowing them to marry?
The arguments of the homophobes are good for laughs and nothing more.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Here we go again with the false comparisons to interracial marriage laws of the past. In those cases, people were not being allowed to do something other people could do, on the basis of their skin color. This is completely different, no one can marry within their own gender, doesn't matter what color they are or what kind of sex they like.
Look, let's just save a lot of time and trouble here, and put it like it is... You guys favor legalizing something that most of America is opposed to, because you don't see anything wrong with it. You have a moral double-standard, where you want to establish morals based on your personal beliefs of right and wrong, and you feel those who don't agree with you are racist homophobic bigots. Only YOU get to decide what is right and wrong in society, the rest of us should just sit down and shut up and let YOU decide what is and isn't morally acceptable, and we'll all get along just fine! That about sums up your debate here!
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
Now, now Bruce; there's no need for you to get all upset.
You will have to admit though; that you've sure spent a lot of time talking about animal sex and now child marriages, that it could cause someone to question your motives.
I do find it odd that you've found it necessary to denigrate the conversation to the point where you have to include a litany of insults and put downs.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Why do you continue to run to this lame argument? How does pedophilia or necrophilia effect YOU? IS anyone requiring YOU to consider those moral? How are YOU damaged by those who practice these perversions of sex? The SAME arguments can be made for ANY sexual deviancy, that can be made for homosexuality!
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
And yet you've admitted that you attended a gay marriage (deviant by your standards) of gay friends of yours (deviant by your standards).
Just curious; but when they said does anyone object, did you stand up and object because they were two deviants participating in a deviant ceremony??
Southern Chicken
Verified User
You know that laws are changed based on unequal treatment of race and gender right?
Of course, we can redefine the age of consent. We did. If you were honestly concerned about it you might focus on changing Alabama's age of consent laws, which appear somewhat archaic. Instead you are bitching about gay marriage which has absolutely nothing to do with age of consent laws.
How amny times do I have to tell you, dumbfuck. PMP is arguing that this burden on society is a reason for prohibiting homosexual marriage.
You are absolutely right, the same arguments can be used for any "sexual deviancy" yet only homosexuals are singled out. Swingers are not prohibited from marrying. Why is it that the law demands that PMP consider such practices normal/moral? Why is that okay? That was the point.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Lying to children by saying queer is normal is immoral.
Every black person was allowed to marry someone of their own race and whites enjoyed the same right. That was the argument given. Claiming everyone, hetero or homo, has the same right to marry someone of a different gender is not much different.