Why "protecting marriage" is retarded

[Josh_LA]

maybe i'm better read on foreign news then you are. It has already happened in england, and the nwo is global in nature.

Also, i read history as well. The nazi brownshirts were likewise composed of homosexual 'activists'. There is a reason that they are being recruited for that side of the agenda, and why the attacks on the church and the old woman with the cross just occured.

oh no, nazis again!

Pink swastika propaganda.

 

[BeFranklin]

No, all it means when you are given a license is you agree you will act like you're in a relationship, you can lie for all we care, so this "approval" is meaningless. Society CAN and SHOULD give any two people who can enjoy the convenience or incentives of filing joint taxes (or not filing at all) to do so. So legally, that's all the marriage license IS, a stamp of approval you can file your taxes jointly and visit in a hospital, even if you hate each other!

Just like T-Mobile allows "couple plans" for any two people who know each other and agree to pay the plan.

Why SHOULDN'T any two people be allowed a marriage/couple/paired up license? Why should only straight, reproducing, non-anal heterosexual couples be given a privelege?

So you are saying you do support income taxes for indivuals, even if its unconstitutional, as long as gays are let in on the tax credits too? :o

Just felt like returning the same.

 

[BeFranklin]

oh no, nazis again!

Pink swastika propaganda.

Its not propaganda.

 

[Josh_LA]

In a completely unrelated thread, which has nothing to do with this issue, I noticed you are given to sophism and not looking at the real world and how things actually work. If you are being truely objective, you'd have an objective you were trying to accomplish... and a measure for what works and what doesn't.

Case in point, there is a good reason in law that siblings are restricted from marrying is their children are much more likely to suffer from genetic problems. Thats the real world reason, and again its about protecting children.

I despise the people on this thread who have hated the children and been pc. You've got two choices here, a strong america or a weak america of diseases like aids, the most putrid sort of sex in public, few children, decadence, and death.

I DO have an objective, it's to challenge artificial and unnecessary norms that are in conflict of freedom. It's to allow society to self destruct if all we have are stupid values that are breakable upon disbelief.

The law should NOT restrict anybody from marrying, marrying means nothing in the law's eyes, it only means they file joint taxes, and have rights to visit. It says nothing about love, children, sex or otherwise.

I am not interested in protecting children, sorry I grew up lucky or wasn't aborted. Unless you set a better example of protecting children or taking care of children that people seem to neglect, keep the preaching to your own.

I definitely want a strong America, that's why I'm a eugenicist & social Darwinist. And fags don't hurt us, they die and never have children.

 

[Josh_LA]

So you are saying you do support income taxes for indivuals, even if its unconstitutional, as long as gays are let in on the tax credits too? :o

Just felt like returning the same.

I don't believe in the Constitution, I believe in freedom, and equality.

 

[Josh_LA]

Its not propaganda.

you gotta have something better to say than comparing fags to Hitler and stuff you stole from the Pink Swastika, as if Nazis didn't have Christians, as if Nazis didn't use Christianity as a driving force to persecute fags and Jews.

 

[BeFranklin]

you gotta have something better to say than comparing fags to Hitler and stuff you stole from the Pink Swastika, as if Nazis didn't have Christians, as if Nazis didn't use Christianity as a driving force to persecute fags and Jews.

I could post all day since your information is wrong.

 

[BeFranklin]

I am not interested in protecting children, sorry I grew up lucky or wasn't aborted. Unless you set a better example of protecting children or taking care of children that people seem to neglect, keep the preaching to your own.

I definitely want a strong America, that's why I'm a eugenicist & social Darwinist. And fags don't hurt us, they die and never have children.

This explains it all. Just as sick as I thought.

 

[Josh_LA]

I posted more then you, and could post all day since your information is wrong. At least post a link to refute But this is the way it was.

you post a bunch of gay activism, which is fair enough, disgusting. but I agree that would be the time to get defensive. so there's no argument there.

that's far different from using legislation to "protect" a socially constructed institution that can be "destroyed" simply by using the wrong word.

that though, is still quite different than talking about how Nazis had fags in their ranks. What didn't Nazis have? (Yes, they even had Jews) Whether they used faggotry to recruit members is irrelevant, people are either recruited by fags or recruited by people like you, out of fearmongering. I don't play this stupid game, I'm here to say fags can go to hell for all I care, and people who bother to worry about them are just insecure about themselves.

Yes, I am saying that if you are afraid of retards infecting your brain, you're retarded. Not saying that if you hate retards you're a retard. If you're afraid of dictatorship, you're afraid you're going to become one of them, doesn't mean you are one, but it means you can't stand on your feet (or trust others to).

 

[Josh_LA]

This explains it all. Just as sick as I thought.

Yep, I really care about how sick you think I am. Stronger America you asked?

 

[BeFranklin]

you post a bunch of gay activism, which is fair enough, disgusting. but I agree that would be the time to get defensive. so there's no argument there.

that's far different from using legislation to "protect" a socially constructed institution that can be "destroyed" simply by using the wrong word.

that though, is still quite different than talking about how Nazis had fags in their ranks. What didn't Nazis have? (Yes, they even had Jews) Whether they used faggotry to recruit members is irrelevant, people are either recruited by fags or recruited by people like you, out of fearmongering. I don't play this stupid game, I'm here to say fags can go to hell for all I care, and people who bother to worry about them are just insecure about themselves.

Yes, I am saying that if you are afraid of retards infecting your brain, you're retarded. Not saying that if you hate retards you're a retard. If you're afraid of dictatorship, you're afraid you're going to become one of them, doesn't mean you are one, but it means you can't stand on your feet (or trust others to).

Ok, so you said you are a eugenistics and a social dawanists who doesn't believe in the constitution and hates fags and Christians. Anything else? :o

 

[Josh_LA]

This explains it all. Just as sick as I thought.

hey, at least I'm honest about my hatred and beliefs. You're willing to say what's wrong with gays but not willing to say they're not equal or don't deserve to be treated equally.

Chill kids, I don't hate gay people for being gay, I don't waste time and energy hating anybody. But there's nothing wrong if somebody's stupid enough to hate people just for the fun of it either. Hatred and stupidity is OK, dishonesty and hypocrisy is NOT.

 

[BeFranklin]

hey, at least I'm honest about my hatred and beliefs. You're willing to say what's wrong with gays but not willing to say they're not equal or don't deserve to be treated equally.

Chill kids, I don't hate gay people for being gay, I don't waste time and energy hating anybody. But there's nothing wrong if somebody's stupid enough to hate people just for the fun of it either. Hatred and stupidity is OK, dishonesty and hypocrisy is NOT.

I've said the whole thread I think that homosexuality is a perversion, and the sodomy laws should be put back in place at least to include things such as shutting down gay bars and glory holes, etc. Also, its a problem that ought to be treated.

 

[Josh_LA]

Ok, so you said you are a eugenistics and a social dawanists who doesn't believe in the constitution and hates fags and Christians. Anything else? :o

not quite. but almost there.

I'm a eugenicist as I believe in improving generations, and genetics has a lot to do with a person's future.

I'm a social Darwinist, as opposed to a social Marxist.

I don't believe in the Constitution, it's just a piece of paper, it took brave men with guns who killed people to actually make this piece of paper worth a look, and that's the price of freedom.

I don't hate fags, but there's nothing wrong if I do.

I don't hate Christians, I hate when anybody doesn't think. This can include fags, communists, Jews, Muslims or Christians.

 

[Josh_LA]

I've said the whole thread I think that homosexuality is a perversion, and the sodomy laws should be put back in place at least to include things such as shutting down gay bars and glory holes, etc. Also, its a problem that ought to be treated.

so what would be the appropriate punishment for sodomy? If sodomy is a crime, it'd be illegal to do it in the privacy of your own home as well, right? Mr. Constitution?

 

[BeFranklin]

so what would be the appropriate punishment for sodomy? If sodomy is a crime, it'd be illegal to do it in the privacy of your own home as well, right? Mr. Constitution?

Local laws don't have anything to do with the US constitution. There is also a difference between crimes - which put you in jail, and fines, which put you out of business. I already posted what I believe in general about vices.

This whole thread is anything but the privacy of your own home, in fact it shows the hypocricy of that original idea as it has run its course - now its about forcing kids to be taught about homosexuality in kindergarten, forced re-definition of marriage, hate crime legislation, etc etc.

If a drug addict has a serious problem with his mental stability, for instance he is seeing pink elephants and is a danger to himself and others, a judge can issue an order forcing him to go to treatment. Same thing should be done with homosexuals spreading diseases in public places.

 

[Josh_LA]

Local laws don't have anything to do with the US constitution. There is also a difference between crimes - which put you in jail, and fines, which put you out of business. I already posted what I believe in general about vices.

This whole thread is anything but the privacy of your own home, in fact it shows the hypocricy of that original idea as it has run its course - now its about forcing kids to be taught about homosexuality in kindergarten, forced re-definition of marriage, hate crime legislation, etc etc.

If a drug addict has a serious problem with his mental stability, for instance he is seeing pink elephants and is a danger to himself and others, a judge can issue an order forcing him to go to treatment. Same thing should be done with homosexuals spreading diseases in public places.

so local laws can conflict with the Constitution is what you're saying. But if something is good and right, as you believe, WHY SHOULDN'T we have sodomy laws on the federal level?

Children being taught anything in public schools is bad enough, I don't think teaching them about fags is much worse. I'm angry enough they're taught to treat blacks like people.

I'm definitely opposed to hate crime legislation, and this case isn't one of them.

Why should we bother letting drug addicts and fags live if they are certain to be of any worry? Obviously you're willing to give them the benefit of doubt that they're OK until proven guilty (which is hypocritical in my standards).

So if lesbians don't spread diseases, we should encourage lesbian behavior, not only do they never get pregnant and never need abortion, they'll never get the nasty anal diseases we fear so much. Lesbians hardly (if ever) rape anybody (yes, there was a recent documentary called "She stole my voice" about it). What harm to dykes do to society? I can understand fags are filthy, but please tell me what's wrong with dykes that the government should worry about?

 

[BeFranklin]

Nope, that wasn't what I was saying.

 

[chwisch87]

I've said the whole thread I think that homosexuality is a perversion, and the sodomy laws should be put back in place at least to include things such as shutting down gay bars and glory holes, etc. Also, its a problem that ought to be treated.

Isn't that Totalitarianism? You are using the government as a end to your means?

Lets just get some things out of the way shall we ...

Homosexuality IS NOT a choice. According the the American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association and the American Medical Association and many others. No reputable human sciences organization says homosexuality is a choice. Since 1972 Homosexuality has been not apart of the list of mental disorders. It is not curable or treatable. Anyone who says differently is lying and has probably been disbarred from practice therapy if they ever had a license in the first place.

Heterosexuals can spread STD's as much as Gay people (notably men) can. Just because you are straight doesn't mean you can't get HIV ...

You may wrongly believe homosexuality is perversion (on the bases of a 2000 year old book i guess) but using laws to discriminate against homosexuals is wrong on all levels. You are not affected in any way by what gay people do, therefore you have no right to say otherwise. It is NOT your place to say what is right and wrong as you are not the moral arbiter of anyone except yourself. If you don't like gay people then i suggest you don't kiss another man and leave me the hell alone.

 

[Emrys359]

ROFL. Its funny how in a post where I was saying its none of you damn business who marries who, I then go on to say that there is some valid argument to single sex parents raising kids BUT THAT IS A DIFFERENT ARGUMENT and the only thing you reply to is the parenting thing. Typical.


First off since you want to focus on what is not the issue here Ill respond. I didnt say it was bad for single sex parents to raise kids. I said there is some valid argument. That means in my head I havent decided.


Second I dont want to hear any crap about how there are so many kids up for adoption its hard to find parents for them. There are several waiting lists for parents who want to adopt. The only kids who have problems fiding parents are the ones who are too old. Most people want babies. So thats bullshit.


Im offended compleatly by your ignorance. Who do we owe something to if not our children?


Finally I never said anything about fags and dykes. Those are your words and you use them because you dont have the intellect to find better words. In my opinion these words are just as bad as nigger and only serve to opress people esspecially when they are used BY gay people. Get your head out of your ass.


As far as shutting up. Good luck with that... I say what I think and ANY man who wants to take that RIGHT from me had better pack a damn lunch.


This is pretty much all I have to say about this. I came to this forum looking to see if there is anyone willing to stand up for thier country yet. I chose this post as the one to respond to because I had just had this discussion with friends and I figured I would start here. But you sir are obviously a simple creature driven by your emotions and not your intellect as is obvious by most of your replies in this thread. Arguing with you is just about equal to cow tipping on my waste of time-o-meter. Thank you for the debate.

Yes, and there's an even better argument that children who don't have parents grow up even worse.

So your options are:

*biological parents that are good
*biological parents that are trailer drunk
*adopted straight parents who use you for tax cuts
*adopted single parent who uses you for company
*adopted gay parents who can be any of the above, but given the social stigma, probably are expected to act more upright with all the pressure.
*no parents.

Keep in mind it's NOBODY'S FAULT that a child has no parents, our society has no problem letting these children starve to death as we OWE THEM NOTHING. Giving them gay parents is an alternative to leaving them to rot and die, if they have a problem with that, they are more than free to choose. Until more straight parents step up to the plate, you can shut up about how lousy fags and dykes are at being parents. Let's see you do better.