]Lots of rambling
Marriage doesn't force anyone to do anything... PERIOD.
THE LOWLY HOMOSEXUAL
And we're prepared to go to whatever lengths you people require us to go, to stop ya. You're the aggressor, so you set the rules... But rest assured, we'll be there for ya, which ever way you decide to go.
We've accepted you as human beings... we don't give a damn what two men do in the privacy of their home with a midget, two goats, a quart of Quaker State and a unicyle. But we're not ABOUT to go any further with it.
Moderator's Warning: |
Just found this forum. And picked out a thread at random.
Djeezes, djeezes, djeezes.
Everyone with an ounce of common sense regards homosexuality and same sex marriage as OK as 2 + 2 makes 4. Problem? What problem?
It's intellectuals like PubliusInfinitu that spend their entire life reaching multiple orgasms by justifying the unjustifiable that make my day.
Though I'm not French, I live in France. Help, I must be doomed.
Time for a Stella.
There is not ONE STATE within the fifty United States that precludes homosexuals, declared or otherwise from marriage... NOT ONE~
I did not make any argument against polygamy. This has been pointed out repeatedly in this thread.
I certainly can pick what should be equal and what should not. A brick is not equally as heavy as a feather. I don't have to support the concept both are equal. Under the law, convicted felons are less equal than those who are not. I do not have to argue otherwise.
You mean "who" should be equal.
As I said, you can do as you like, but you don't retain credibility when you choose to cherry pick.
The above post was edited to reflect reality.
I found the original version funnier.
Only because it was ironic.
And a classic in the self-ownage department.
So you think convicted felons are equal to every one else? Or do you pick?
So you think convicted felons are equal to every one else? Or do you pick?
Of course they are equal, which is why Due Process had to be used against them.
Polygamists, not so much. Laws against polygamy are as bigoted as anti-sodomy laws.
Where have I advocated anti-polygamy laws?
In your apathy.
ad·vo·cate [v. ad-vuh-keyt; n. ad-vuh-kit, -keyt]
–verb (used with object)
1. to speak or write in favor of; support or urge by argument; recommend publicly: He advocated higher salaries for teachers.
–noun
2. a person who speaks or writes in support or defense of a person, cause, etc. (usually fol. by of ): an advocate of peace.
3. a person who pleads for or in behalf of another; intercessor.
4. a person who pleads the cause of another in a court of law.
Advocate | Define Advocate at Dictionary.com
By its very definition it is impossible to advocate through apathy, as it requires action to actually act in favor of the thing, not simply inaction in not supporting it.
There are reasons to include marriage of gays but not polygamy.
Yet in 15 years of debating this... of the THOUSANDS of advocates of normalizing abnormality... NOT ONE has ever come CLOSE to accepting the simple fact that every whim of the homosexual lobbies stated goals could be met by simply incorporating.
Redress isn't subverting anything. Liberals are not subverting a SINGLE THING.
Or, even simpler, the bigots can be informed that someone else's marriage is, by definition, someone else's business, not theirs, and that the bigots can butt out.
See how easy that is?
Of course they are equal, which is why Due Process had to be used against them.
Polygamists, not so much. Laws against polygamy are as bigoted as anti-sodomy laws.
If it's non of the bigot's business, why ask the bigot for his vote; why even discuss the issue with the bigot?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?