LogicIsForSquares Posted September 23, 2016 Report Share Posted September 23, 2016 ...Are you autistic or trolling ? Can't tell. An autistic troll? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 23, 2016 Report Share Posted September 23, 2016 Let's say in 1995 some flaming queer wants to marry some old lady for convenience. At the courthouse he openly professed his faggotry to the clerk. The old lady has known he was a fudge packer for years but doesn't care. What do you suppose happened? Nothing. As long as both parties were willing to enter into a legal marriage there was nothing stopping them. That's why it was never about equal rights. It was about changing what marriage is and has been since the dawn of time. It wasn't the fact that fags were gay. It was they wanted to do something that's not even real. In 1995, two gay dudes could walk right into the courthouse and legally enter into a marriage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbluhm86 Posted September 23, 2016 Report Share Posted September 23, 2016 Actually I think civil unions are a perfect compromise. Call it whatever you want have the ceremony wherever you like. Habits action by whichever religious organization you want or not if that's your choice. That's pretty much how it is now, and the only real point of contention now from people against it is that it's called "marriage" instead of "civil union", as if calling it a marriage is breaking some sort of law; it's absurd at this point. It's akin to someone grabbing a bottle of Heinz 57 and saying "look, you can look and taste just the same as ketchup, but you have to call it catsup instead". Civil unions are the same thing as marriages, legally wise, so I don't see what the problem is in calling it marriage I don't see the problem. (Unfortunately it won't be long before somebody sues a church for refusing to perform the religious ceremony) I can give you that, and when they do, they will most likely be in the wrong. As much as I believe that churches are places where the intellect and reason goes to die, I think that they do have the right to be selective in the membership of their little club if they wish. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Post Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 jbluhm86: verse 21 "he shall cometh to the people on the shiny tablets and wireless connections everywhere to spew boredom beyond comprehension. Low and behold the jbluhm for he is the one who will kill the buzz of any mortal man that tries to understand his rhetoric." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted September 25, 2016 Report Share Posted September 25, 2016 jbluhm86: verse 21 "he shall cometh to the people on the shiny tablets and wireless connections everywhere to spew boredom beyond comprehension. Low and behold the jbluhm for he is the one who will kill the buzz of any mortal man that tries to understand his rhetoric." Fucking A my friend, fucking A! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 Are you just intentionally obtuse? Of course gay people wanted to be able to marry their partners. Being able to marry their partner is equality. How is that somehow more than being equal? What business does the liberal gov have, forcing about half of America to redefine real marriage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 What business does the liberal gov have, forcing about half of America to redefine real marriage? What business do you have telling people they can't get married? Not to mention "about half" is pretty generous.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 well, stupidass woodypeckerhead, I never said I don't think gays should not be allowed to get "married". asswhole birdbrain. civil unions would be the gays "marriage"...legally accepted, etc. the gov has no business forcing half? of America to redefine REAL MARRIAGE into a perversion of what it really is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 Again, not half. Just because you keep saying something, doesn't make it true (but then again, if you understood that, we could save ourselves a lot of time on this site) The gov could get out of marriage all together. Everyone gets a civil union. If little churches want to only give "real marriages" out to some people, let them. Right now though, that's not how it works. There is no reason for gays to not be able to get married. The "Real marriage" line is bullshit. How much different is marriage now than 200 years ago? Is it more real now, or was it real then? How much did you pay for your 12 year old wife? Regardless, this is all meaningless. Gay marriage will be legal across the board soon enough. You're fighting a losing battle. All you have are delusional stats and calling me names apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 you are bullshit. surely there must be something wrong with you - you don't get the content of any post you "disagree" with. I don't believe your incessant "diversions" are even intentional anymore. it's like your feathers molt, and you try to hump your ken doll, but your beak keeps getting in the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 You posted something. I disagreed. I even posted data to show why something you posted was wrong. You respond with insults and name calling. You act like I'm the one derailing a thread because I disagree with you, but it is pretty fucking obvious you're the one that can't take someone disagreeing with you. Look at this last chain of posts. It is pretty damn obvious. 1) A good bit less than one half of Americans think gay marriage should be illegal 2) That is mainly older generations, and as such this number will keep dropping. Gay marriage will be legal across the country eventually. 3) There is no reason to not allow gays to be married. No legitimate reason has ever been given. Your personal beliefs do not determine what other people can't do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 1. YOU ARE WRONG. 61% of Americans don't want Supreme Court to force gay 'marriage' on ... https://www.lifesitenews.com/.../61-of-americans-dont-want-supr... LifeSite Feb 26, 2015 - 61% of Americans don't want Supreme Court to force gay 'marriage' on the states: poll ... Supreme Court forcing the entire country to accept marriage redefinition. ... A majority of Americans, 53 percent, agree that marriage should be .... was the “victimization of so many women within their marriages,” he felt ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 2. I support civil unions, which in the eyes of the law, would be equal to REAL MARRIAGE BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN> See #1. You are WRONG again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 3) There is no reason to not allow gays to be married. OF COURSE THERE IS> SEE #! DAMMIT. one more time, you asswhole birdbrain. I never, ever have said anything about my personal beliefs changing/affecting blah blah asswhole blah... what other people do. now STFU, you don't know what you are talking about. and go read #1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 A poll by the Family Research Council from 2015.... hahaha. Clearly more legitimate than a Gallup poll from 2016. Hahaha. You can live in your delusions all you want. Unfortunately you can still vote, so your delusions will affect others. Eventually though we'll turn the corner and you'll be on the losing side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 Cal, that is a survey from the Family Research Council. The equivalent of using a 2nd Amendment survey from MSNBC viewers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 3) There is no reason to not allow gays to be married. OF COURSE THERE IS> SEE #! DAMMIT. one more time, you asswhole birdbrain. I never, ever have said anything about my personal beliefs changing/affecting blah blah asswhole blah... what other people do. now STFU, you don't know what you are talking about. and go read #1. Damn you're mad. You really can't handle others believing something others than you, huh? Why shouldn't gays get married? Because you keep saying "real marriage" like it means something? That isn't a reason. WHY shouldnt gays be able to get married? What bad thing will happen if they do? What is the downside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 the gov has no business forcing Americans to redefine a word, in a fit of political leftwing activism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 So I take it that camping trip of Cal's didn't really calm him down any? the gov has no business forcing Americans to redefine a word, in a fit of political leftwing activism. This sounds incredibly familiar over the past 150 years. the gov has no business forcing Americans to redefine a word, in a fit of political leftwing activism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 2. I support civil unions, which in the eyes of the law, would be equal to REAL MARRIAGE BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN> See #1. You are WRONG again. Cal, if we used the definition of marriage that you claim is X amount of years old, then all marriages would be arranged. Dowrys would still be a thing. Wives would be celebrating their 10 year anniversaries at 23. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 marriage Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical, Financial, Idioms,Encyclopedia, Wikipedia. Marriage The legal status, condition, or relationship that results from a contractby which one man and one woman, who have the capacity to enterinto such an agreement, mutually promise to live together in therelationship of Husband and Wife in law for life, or until the legaltermination of the relationship. Marriage is a legally sanctioned contract between a man and awoman. Entering into a marriage contract changes the legal status ofboth parties, giving husband and wife new rights and obligations.Public policy is strongly in favor of marriage based on the belief that itpreserves the family unit. Traditionally, marriage has been viewed asvital to the preservation of morals and civilization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 the gov has no business forcing Americans to redefine a word, in a fit of political leftwing activism. Word meanings can change with time. Ex: 'awful' means something very different than how it started. It used to mean that it was 'worthy of being awed' and not something terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 Cal, if we used the definition of marriage that you claim is X amount of years old, then all marriages would be arranged. Dowrys would still be a thing. Wives would be celebrating their 10 year anniversaries at 23. Woah woah woah Not that real. Just real enough so the gays can't get married. Because my book says I shouldn't like them. That's literally my only reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 Word meanings can change with time. Ex: 'awful' means something very different than how it started. It used to mean that it was 'worthy of being awed' and not something terrible. Wrong. Everything should be exactly like it was in the 1950s. And if it changed it should go back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 So I expect you to only speak like the Queens English because to use terms in their modern versions would be a perversion of the language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 Wrong. Everything should be exactly like it was in the 1950s. And if it changed it should go back! Taking 'gay' back from the 'gays'! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 Doesn't the word fag mean cigarette in England? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 "the gov has no business forcing Americans to redefine a word, in a fit of political leftwing activism." Me ********************************** LogicIsForSquares, on 25 Sept 2016 - 10:36 PM, said: Word meanings can change with time. Ex: 'awful' means something very different than how it started. It used to mean that it was 'worthy of being awed' and not something terrible. ******************************** HAHAHAHAHHA. Yeah, that's a good one. Except you omitted the part about "THE GOV HAS NO BUSINESS FORCING AMERICANS TO REDEFINE A WORD". Can you hear me now? Words do change. Now, go back in real history, and let me know when a freaking GOVERNMENT (sorry, I only have a 24 font size to help ya).....FORCED AMERICANS TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF A WORD BY COURT ORDER. Now, you are wrong, and have a real nice Monday. (I'm only up because I fell asleep watching the boring Dallas game, and I have to install a new router) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 Cal, no one is forcing anyone to change how they interpret a word. You can keep on using the term 'real marriage' all you wish. However, the government will interpret marriage as being a contract between two people. Just like the word 'affordable' means something very different to me than it does to the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 How dare a gay queer homo demand a REAL marriage the kind of which Allah dictates may only be enjoyed between a man and his 8 year old bride? Fuckin' bum-punchers, amirite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.