codeorama Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 BJ from a female. Unnatural. Cannot lead to procreation. Must be disdained. Exaclty... but you won't get the hypocrites to acknowledge that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rincewind Posted November 8, 2006 Author Share Posted November 8, 2006 Mussinalover,I compared the relevance of the term "marriage" in the case of a homosexual and me the dog lover. Reread. I know what you wrote, and I know what you were/are trying to insinuate. And I don't like Mussina - I can't wait until he gets traded or becomes a FA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Here is Virginia any type of bj is illegal. Seems archaic right? Breakin the law, breakin the law... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Sexual relations with a female - naturalSexual relations with a male - unnatural What part of this don't you understand? http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061012/ts_nm/environment_homosexuality_dc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Sexual relations with a female - naturalSexual relations with a male - unnatural What part of this don't you understand? The part where you respond to my point. Since you haven't yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Mussinalover,I compared the relevance of the term "marriage" in the case of a homosexual and me the dog lover. Reread. And I pointed out that one is a union between two people. People are supposed to be equal before the law. Dogs are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Exaclty... but you won't get the hypocrites to acknowledge that... French kissing a female is not natural???? Are you saying every sexual act that does not involve intercourse is unnatural? Better stop feeling my wifes ass. Must be unnatural. What don't you and predicto not understand about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 And I pointed out that one is a union between two people. People are supposed to be equal before the law. Dogs are not. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Marriage between two gays is NOT equal. Nor is marrying a dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Portisizzle, you remind me of Jim Carrey in Dumb & Dumber when he says "quitsies no startsies, tripple stamped it"... and then he plugs both ears, shuts his eyes, and says "nananananana" over and over again so he can't hear any counter arguments. .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Portisizzle, you remind me of Jim Carrey in Dumb & Dumber when he says "quitsies no startsies, tripple stamped it"... and then he plugs both ears, shuts his eyes, and says "nananananana" over and over again so he can't hear any counter arguments..... of course I see Predicto and code in the same light in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 French kissing a female is not natural????Are you saying every sexual act that does not involve intercourse is unnatural? Better stop feeling my wifes ass. Must be unnatural. What don't you and predicto not understand about this? The point is, when you say that sex is JUST for procreation, you are incorrect. I'd guess that most people that have sex don't want to procreate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 I really don't buy the whole "marry my dog" line of reasoning. But as far as legislating morality I am interested in how the "pro gay marriage" or "no government involvement" crowds feel about multiple spouses. It seems to me that that line has been drawn, by the government, for quite some time. Are we advocating an "anything goes" approach to marriage. What if I can't choose between the hot chick and the chick that makes all the money? The amendment specifically said "one man and one woman" and not "men and women". I have chosen to remain single to this point...where are my equal rights and tax benefits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Based on their sexual preferences at home - in the bedroom.Wait a second Rince, I thought gay marriage wasn't about sex? At least according to the advocates, right?Thanks for confirming that its about sex. And therefore a CHOICE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 And this is what I would agree upon as well....Divorce is one of the major problems in this country IMO. And its a heck of a lot more prominant than same sex marriages, but because one is at the forefront and the other isn't just shows how far people have their heads up their.... well, you know... \agree 100% i also feel gay marriages may not have the same divorce rate due to the age of many when they know they do want to settle down etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 French kissing a female is not natural????Are you saying every sexual act that does not involve intercourse is unnatural? Better stop feeling my wifes ass. Must be unnatural. What don't you and predicto not understand about this? They do understand. However, they realise that as long as the discussion is about equal rights for citizens, then they look bad, because what their position is "I don't want (those people) to have equal rights", and society has progressed to the point where that position doesn't look good. But as long as they can make the discussion about dogs, or children, or reproduction, or the Old Testiment, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or anything but the real world, then they can sit in their tree house and not recognise reality. (Or look in a mirror.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 The point is, when you say that sex is JUST for procreation, you are incorrect. Well, that depends on your definition of 'sex'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rincewind Posted November 8, 2006 Author Share Posted November 8, 2006 Wait a second Rince, I thought gay marriage wasn't about sex? At least according to the advocates, right?Thanks for confirming that its about sex. And therefore a CHOICE. Don't know how you drew those lines and ended at choice. As for the sex thing - the way I see it is being gay means you like to have sex with those of your gender. This is a gay rights issue. Sex is at the deep down heart of it - whether either side wants to admit it or not. The problem is the surface causes enough arguments that we don't need to worry about what's at the heart of the matter. edit: I should have said being gay means you are attracted to those of the same gender - you can still be abstinant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Breakin the law, breakin the law... Sodomite! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Well, that depends on your definition of 'sex'. Zing... :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 This is an equal rights issue. There are tax benefits at stake here. "Benefits". Why should abnormal people get benefits? And where does it stop? You know there will be drag queens and pervs that will push the issue until the are a protected species Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rincewind Posted November 8, 2006 Author Share Posted November 8, 2006 "Benefits". Why should abnormal people get benefits? And where does it stop? You know there will be drag queens and pervs that will push the issue until the are a protected species Albinos are abnormal - do you not think they should be afforded the same benefits as you and I? Seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 I really don't buy the whole "marry my dog" line of reasoning. But as far as legislating morality I am interested in how the "pro gay marriage" or "no government involvement" crowds feel about multiple spouses. It seems to me that that line has been drawn, by the government, for quite some time. Are we advocating an "anything goes" approach to marriage. What if I can't choose between the hot chick and the chick that makes all the money? The amendment specifically said "one man and one woman" and not "men and women". Honest answer - polygamy is a lot harder to figure out in this argument. Unlike portis' dishonest and inflammatory dog analogy (or the even more dishonest and inflammatory pedo analogy), with polygamy you have a real question of consenting adults, and I am not sure what I think about it, to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 who cares, let the homos marry eachother... As Chris Rock says, "Gays have the right to be as miserable as everyone else." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Albinos are abnormal - do you not think they should be afforded the same benefits as you and I? Seriously. Albino's don't have a choice to be albino. Well, except Michael Jackson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted November 8, 2006 Share Posted November 8, 2006 Here's some questions. What if there was no tax break for marriage? Would gays still want to be married? And what is the point of marriage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.