Five reasons why gay marriage is a basic, conservative value

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
BAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

oh wait, are you being serious?

ummm....

Any doubts that I was talking to a teenager have been dispelled.

Anyway, good luck with the rest of your adolescence.

I wish!!!

By the way, what are your thoughts on the study by the Canadian government regarding homosexual couples that states that "violence was twice as common among homosexual couples compared with heterosexual couples" and the one by the American College of Paediatricians who cite several studies on violence among homosexual couples which found violence is two to three times more common than among married heterosexual couples?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
What do you think I've been laughing at dude!!!

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Erno86

 

I happen to like Mark Levin. The fact that you have pitted a real conservative against the RINO Establishment shows what a fallacy your argument is. I doubt you are a serious conservative or you would never have invoked the name of Mark Levin.

Perhaps you are a bit confused between the definitions of true social and fiscal conservatives and more left-leaning Libertarians(which I surmise you might be).

edit on 23-5-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

You call Mark Levin "conservative"??? Mark Levin, is nothing but a right-wing kook, intent on fixating his tyrannical views on his listening radio audence, without the allowance of any opposing caller's view's being allowed. The only true "uninhibited radio," is Les Kinsolving on WCBM radio in Baltimore, Maryland, who I have the pleasure to call Les on a frequent basis. Lester, is one of the member's of the White House press corp.

Les is an avid anti-gay marriage advocate, who asks the typical question --- "do you think it should be legal to marry a horse, dead body, chicken, etc etc. The answer is: this is not a question of beastiality or necrophilia, but a question of a commitment of marriage between a loving, consenting, human adult couple; same-sex or not!!!

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
So are we using "significant other", "spouse", or "wife" or "husband" any more? How will it read on the marriage certificate?

If the gay social re-engineers have their way, in a number of year the terms 'husband' and 'wife' will be things of the past, spoken only by old men in hushed tones in case the gays take offense.

In this brave new world, we are all equal.

Equal in the sense that the majority bends to the will of the minority. All in the interest of equality of course.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
If we are to discuss equal rights, why not add the pre-born to this category, or people marrying animals? Or how about the Man-boy Love desire for grown men to marry adolescent boys?

It is my understanding that some liberal environmentalists want to allow animals to sue people. Which to me is one of thee most ridiculous things I ever heard of.

edit on 23-5-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-5-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-5-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

We're limiting it to consenting adults because they are the ones, that by law, make the decisions. The others are not capable of giving consent and have a protected status, as they should.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

What do you think I've been laughing at dude!!!

You are back. Sadly you haven't matured since your last visit.

Do you actually have anything to say or is that asking a bit much?

Can I ask you a question:

Do you enjoy being gay? It is a serious question.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
If we are to discuss equal rights, why not add the pre-born to this category, or people marrying animals?

Why stop at two people of the same sex getting married?

Why not three or four, joined in legal union, sorry marriage?

If they are all consenting adults, go for it. I wouldn't participate in any of those things as they don't apply to me, but I have no right to stop consenting adults from doing whatever they wish to do as long as the overall objective is to bring no harm.

reply to post by ollncasino


Not going to answer my question?

Bad form...

But it is a whole page away now, I guess that means it is safe to come back and what-not.

I could re-post it if you forgot?

Also, what about my common-law marraige discovery?

They could legaly be married that way, since it does not dileniate sexes...Loopholes are awesome! They just have to live as "husband" and "wife" and I am sure those are not tied to man/woman only. Cause they are not in the dictionary of law!

reply to post by adigregorio


The key there is "AFTER" obtaining a marriage license from the state. So no the State did not establish the religious value of it.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
We're limiting it to consenting adults because they are the ones, that by law, make the decisions. The others are not capable of giving consent and have a protected status, as they should.

But men could give their consent. If you agree that two men could give their consent to be 'married', can you explain why three men could not be married together if they gave their consent?

It is a serious question and I ask you because I know you are a serious 'dude'.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
Civil Rights Act of 1964

Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Then I demand the right to use the Dallas Cheerleaders dressing room.

Oh wait. Maybe that isn't what they meant...

You want to dress like a cheerleader???
And you're fussing about letting two guys or two women be married? hmmph, kinda self-righteous don't you think?

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
If they are all consenting adults, go for it. I wouldn't participate in any of those things as they don't apply to me, but I have no right to stop consenting adults from doing whatever they wish to do as long as the overall objective is to bring no harm.

That is a very good answer. So you agree with polygamy?

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Meh, semantics methinks. I can not get married without a pastor or some other official correct?

What about marriage at sea? Isn't that up to mari-time law?

Regardless, as I pointed out with "common-law" marraige, you can bypass all the red-tape. I wish I was gay, I would go do this and make a big stink.

Then they would HAVE to re-define marraige, to show either they're bigoted or not.

I swear it's like watching children play in kindergarten. "MINE, this awesome toy (marraige) is MINE!" I swear, I feel less like a human every day. Although, have I been programmed with the us versus them as well? I mean I would be us, and humans them...

Great! Thank you thread!! I have been programmed too, excuse me while I go try to undo this ignorance implanted into me. I wish you folks luck when/if you discover your programming.

(Us versus them, that's what this is. Hate on the folks that are your neighbors, instead of the slave owners that own both parties.)

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Oh yes, how about menage a trois, not to exlude more than one man and woman? What about group marriage? hahaha oh man that is just too much. Oh wait, if it's one man and many wives it becomes a Harem.

I wish someone who is arguing for gay marriage could tell me why a 'marriage' between two men is legitimate but one between three men is not.

I won't hold my breath.

Fine with me if that's what the three of them want. I wouldn't participate in either one, but they are more than welcome to.

When I someday acquire the ability to teleport myself into a parallel reality, I plan on marrying myself. Now let me think about five reasons why that would be right.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
You want to dress like a cheerleader???

And you're fussing about letting two guys or two women be married? hmmph, kinda self-righteous don't you think?

I am afraid you have missed the point. Being gay, I can understand why it went over your head.

Economical collapse, mass murder, drones, spying on us,etc...those arent things that matter,,what matters is that gays get married and straight couples can have abortions.

Originally posted by ollncasino


Why stop at two people of the same sex getting married?

Why not three or four, joined in legal union, sorry marriage?

Now thats how millions of Muslims exist, so nothing new there, and historically one man and several wives was a legal union to bind ownership.

You are classifying marriage between one man and one woman for "love" and that is relatively new phenomena globally...... you know priests use to get married till inheritance laws meant the church was losing property to offspring, so they banned marriage for the clergy.

Whats the difference between divorcing and saying vows more than once in your life?

That is to say, marriage has always been a social construct, and how it is done, is up to the those getting married, not those who fear other people sex lives.

Yawn im bored with this. Unsubscribing from this nincompoopery.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

What do you think I've been laughing at dude!!!

You are back. Sadly you haven't matured since your last visit.

Do you actually have anything to say or is that asking a bit much?

Can I ask you a question:

Do you enjoy being gay? It is a serious question.

If I were, I would find a way to enjoy it. How about you? Do you enjoy being gay?

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
If they are all consenting adults, go for it. I wouldn't participate in any of those things as they don't apply to me, but I have no right to stop consenting adults from doing whatever they wish to do as long as the overall objective is to bring no harm.

That is a very good answer. So you agree with polygamy?

Not on a personal level, but I'm not opposed if other consenting adults are participating in it.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
You want to dress like a cheerleader???

And you're fussing about letting two guys or two women be married? hmmph, kinda self-righteous don't you think?

I am afraid you have missed the point. Being gay, I can understand why it went over your head.

What would you being gay have anything to do with something going over my head? You clearly said you wanted to use their dressing room and it's for dressing, therefore, you want to dress like them. Pretty straight-forward (pardon the pun as I don't wish to insult your homosexuality)