Clevfan4life Posted June 30, 2015 Report Share Posted June 30, 2015 Bottom line again since you are too lazy or stupid, is this: we have plenty of laws, many of them based on sexuality, that are in place for no scientific reason except for the fact they piss us, you and me and just about everyone, off. That's why homosexuality has previously been illegal. Because it pisses people off. not because there's any harm that comes from it. WSS As I said, we've done the heavy lifting on this previously and concluded that 13 or 14 year old girls were on the high avg not even close yet to being mature enough to make their own decisions. I don't know if i'd use the term "scientific" but it was more than just "it pisses us off". Having 13 and 14 year old girls marrying off that early basically negates the rest of their lives...they're used as baby chattle than thrown away. So yes you're correct in part that it became an issue of contention that half our species was being used such...but we also concluded it a kind of scientific way that this practice wasn't just bad for the individual girls but then also bad for the rest of us. Empirical observation was our friend. And you're also correct that homosexuality was illegal because it pissed a certain group of people off, but you were also making the morally relative point that sex with children then...because it was at one time legit, should be brought back into the conversation if we're just gonna let any old perversity stand. And my point, as well as others, is that it's not even remotely comparable. I don't live on the same planet that you do, my world is not morally relative. I have the innate ability to parse out what's right and wrong based on "everyone's" greater good. Probably because I cared to read up on those that went before me and, like I said, did all of this heavy lifting already. I'm in zero mood to debate some of these past issues we got over like was slavery really all that bad as some conservatives have put forth in recent times. Justice Clarence fucking Thomas, a black man himself, just the other day stated that "slaves didn't lose their dignity or humanity because the govt allowed them to be enslaved". So you're not alone Steve, plenty of people still don't get it....some with very very very high positions in our society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Dog Posted June 30, 2015 Report Share Posted June 30, 2015 I barely come on this site anymore. But I knew this would be a hot topic among some of the leftist lemmings, so here you go... First off since this ruling came about you have pedofiles wanting the same rights. Looks like we are all going to go to hell in a hand basket. Just wait until some creepy child lover sues to marry your 10 year old girl or boy. ........ #LoveWins Am I correct? That is the marching cries from all of the idiots on social media. So be it your daughter will be able to marry at any age and whomever she wants. Now here is another one, Why is it Blacks hate Gay people? If you ask me nobody won anything with this ruling. ... well maybe the attorneys won gay divorice court pedofile suing to marry a 9 year old child and the list can go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted June 30, 2015 Report Share Posted June 30, 2015 I barely come on this site anymore. But I knew this would be a hot topic among some of the leftist lemmings, so here you go... First off since this ruling came about you have pedofiles wanting the same rights. Looks like we are all going to go to hell in a hand basket. Just wait until some creepy child lover sues to marry your 10 year old girl or boy. ........ #LoveWins Am I correct? That is the marching cries from all of the idiots on social media. So be it your daughter will be able to marry at any age and whomever she wants. Now here is another one, Why is it Blacks hate Gay people? If you ask me nobody won anything with this ruling. ... well maybe the attorneys won gay divorice court pedofile suing to marry a 9 year old child and the list can go on. The only potential slippery slope here is that polyamorists (sp?) will want to marry each other. I think that will fall flat but it will be worth a discussion seeing as that at one point in our history polygamy wasn't hardly frowned upon. The notion though that this is going to migrate to animals and, as you put it, marrying your 10 year old child....that's just impudent hyperbole. To even contemplate that allowing two adult women or men to marry each other is somehow going to open the door to child fucking is the absence of a rational mind. Will some of these evil pieces of shit that want to fuck your 10 year old without consequences try to make the argument? Of course. But it holds no rational water. End of discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted July 1, 2015 Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 I find this offensive. I don't give a fuck what gay struggle you think you've been through this is a dishonor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted July 1, 2015 Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 I find this offensive. I don't give a fuck what gay struggle you think you've been through this is a dishonor. i completely agree. That picture got a facepallm out of me for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted July 1, 2015 Report Share Posted July 1, 2015 i completely agree. That picture got a facepallm out of me for sure I get the argument gay people or any other oppressed people would make....but that was war, leave that where it belonged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkHole Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 I get the argument gay people or any other oppressed people would make....but that was war, leave that where it belonged. Gee that's amusing coming from a lib.... what about the war on women, the war on minorities, the war on children, the war on the poor and elderly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkHole Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 I get the argument gay people or any other oppressed people would make....but that was war, leave that where it belonged. "Oppressed"? Awwwww...are being overcome by those touchy feely compassionate liberal emotions again Cleve? I agree however... those "heterosexual only" drinking fountains gotta go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Gee that's amusing coming from a lib.... what about the war on women, the war on minorities, the war on children, the war on the poor and elderly? Cleve must be a busy guy what with his being the person who said all of those things during press conferences. As a general rule, any politician that says "a war on (insert something)" is generally just trying to make their opponents look like assholes when really it should only be used in a sentence like "we declared a war on (insert country)". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkHole Posted July 2, 2015 Report Share Posted July 2, 2015 Your life is pointless, want me to expand on that? I can. I'm here for you bro. You can always count on me to expand ad infinitum to you how useless, meaningless and pointless your existence is. Still mad because I said you remind me of Michael Moore?lol But yes please feel free to expand!...interested to hear from one who recently found meaning to his life by trolling all day on this message board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted July 3, 2015 Report Share Posted July 3, 2015 and scene.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted July 3, 2015 Report Share Posted July 3, 2015 pony show lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted July 3, 2015 Report Share Posted July 3, 2015 and scene.... Yeah that funny. I like when he asks "what else would you throw? And the guys like "I don't know. Couscous? Skittles?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted July 3, 2015 Report Share Posted July 3, 2015 http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/07/03/christian-baker-has-a-message-for-the-govt-official-who-just-fined-him-135000-for-declining-a-gay-wedding-cake-hes-doing-this-with-the-wrong-christian/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted July 3, 2015 Report Share Posted July 3, 2015 I believe I stated this before, the denial of service, the religious implications aside - what type of mind is it that says "fine, i'll sue you for NOT wanting to do business with me". If someone doesn't want to accept my money, so be it. I leave and move on to another business. I'm all for marriage equality but this is.... wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted July 3, 2015 Report Share Posted July 3, 2015 I was never against civil unions, on this board. You can call civil unions "binkieboo", whatever. Just don't call it marriage. It is not. Right now, I think the liberal "okay, you can have freedom of religion and speech, but expect consequences" And it is going to bounce right back at them for this belligerent militancy by gays forcing the issue. Liberal mantra - "live and let live, and we get to decide who gets to...." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted July 3, 2015 Report Share Posted July 3, 2015 I'd be all for civil unions but on a day to day basis you didn't hear shit from conservatives on the 'sanctity' of marriage until queers wanted theirs. No talk of the high divorce rated amongst heterosexual couples. No talk of infidelity that plagues straight unions at a reported rate more disproportionate than gay couples. Not even really making mention how marriage for the bulk of human history has been little more than a business contract that promised a dowry and a son. Part of me wanted marriage equality so I could enjoy the false rage that comes from a lot of the right wing on this issue. Also, if civil unions were to have the same rights as marriage, yet for gay couples - then what's the point of calling it anything else? Nobody is going to say to their family were 'civilly unioned" So by wanting to call it something other than what it really is would be just using smoke and mirrors to make yourself feel better about the topic. A true cosmetic approach. That aside, This Is Still Wrong. I have a couple of gay friends and family members that are wonderful people who wouldn't even begin go consider this type of action. My hope is that this is simply a con by a gay couple for the sake of being money hungry and not a representation of the community at large. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted July 3, 2015 Report Share Posted July 3, 2015 I was never against civil unions, on this board. You can call civil unions "binkieboo", whatever. Just don't call it marriage. It is not. Right now, I think the liberal "okay, you can have freedom of religion and speech, but expect consequences" And it is going to bounce right back at them for this belligerent militancy by gays forcing the issue. Liberal mantra - "live and let live, and we get to decide who gets to...." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted July 4, 2015 Report Share Posted July 4, 2015 This ruling shit all over single moms hoping for alimony/child support. Or it should if applied appropriately. Not that I'm for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted July 7, 2015 Report Share Posted July 7, 2015 http://truthuncensored.net/burger-king-celebrates-same-sex-marriage-with-the-proud-whopper/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted July 7, 2015 Report Share Posted July 7, 2015 Chic-fila-a is introducing a mayonaise filled footlong chicken dog to commemorate the event........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted July 7, 2015 Report Share Posted July 7, 2015 Chic-fila-a is introducing a mayonaise filled footlong chicken dog to commemorate the event........ They truly have learned they can corner all markets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Jimmy Carter Says He Believes ‘Jesus Would Approve of Gay Marriage’ — but Even He Makes a Big Admission About That ClaimFormer president Jimmy Carter said on Tuesday that he believes Jesus would approve of gay marriage, though he said that he doesn’t have “any verse in scripture” to corroborate this notion. “I believe he would. I believe Jesus would. I don’t have any verse in scripture…” Carter responded when asked by HuffPo Live host Mark Lamont Hill whether Christ would embrace same-sex nuptials. “I believe that Jesus would approve of gay marriage, but I’m not – that’s just my own personal belief.” http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/07/07/jimmy-carter-says-he-believes-jesus-would-approve-of-gay-marriage-but-even-he-makes-a-big-admission-about-that-claim/ All we will know or ever know in this life about Jesus will be found in the bible. There is no other way. Outside the bible everybody can have their own ideas about who Jesus is. You end up with Jesus whomever you want Him to be. I know a vegan who believes Jesus had to be a vegetarian because there is no possible way He could eat meat. Yet a quick knowledge of the bible shows the passover meal that Jesus and the disciples ate was not a vegan menu but lamb was the main course. Other scriptures show where fish was on the menu. So now Jimmy Carter just "knows" Jesus would approve of gay marriage (like the gal who just "knows" Jesus was a vegan) but cannot give one scripture to back that up however in the bible Jesus Himself says marriage is between one man and one woman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Yeah, he should just find a vague verse and interpret it how he sees fit like everyone else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Yeah, he should just find a vague verse and interpret it how he sees fit like everyone else Nothing vague about it: Matthew 19:4 4 He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Adam and Eve. NOT woody and cleve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.