100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Two more states allow same sex marriage. | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
..those who oppose sodomy are somehow afraid of something,,, never quite figured that term out myself,,, both are accurate gay butt sex is more accurate than both.... anal sex doesn't imply gay, and neither does sodomy... since this thread is about gays, then gay butt sex is appropriate... No, this thread ISN'T about gays. It's about marriage equality for the human race. How you get off by throwing around the term butt sex is beyond me. Maybe you've tried it and like it?? no, it's about gays wanting to be gay... there is no such thing as marriage inequality... any man, gay or not, can marry any woman he wants... gays want extra rights, and to cram their lifestyle down everyone else's throat... man marry woman, woman marry man, seems pretty basic and inclusive of everyone,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
HappyBun
on
Sun 05/12/13 02:30 PM
|
|
..those who oppose sodomy are somehow afraid of something,,, never quite figured that term out myself,,, both are accurate gay butt sex is more accurate than both.... anal sex doesn't imply gay, and neither does sodomy... since this thread is about gays, then gay butt sex is appropriate... No, this thread ISN'T about gays. It's about marriage equality for the human race. How you get off by throwing around the term butt sex is beyond me. Maybe you've tried it and like it?? no, it's about gays wanting to be gay... there is no such thing as marriage inequality... any man, gay or not, can marry any woman he wants... gays want extra rights, and to cram their lifestyle down everyone else's throat... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..those who oppose sodomy are somehow afraid of something,,, never quite figured that term out myself,,, both are accurate gay butt sex is more accurate than both.... anal sex doesn't imply gay, and neither does sodomy... since this thread is about gays, then gay butt sex is appropriate... No, this thread ISN'T about gays. It's about marriage equality for the human race. How you get off by throwing around the term butt sex is beyond me. Maybe you've tried it and like it?? no, it's about gays wanting to be gay... there is no such thing as marriage inequality... any man, gay or not, can marry any woman he wants... gays want extra rights, and to cram their lifestyle down everyone else's throat... man marry woman, woman marry man, seems pretty basic and inclusive of everyone,,, Are you saying that there are no gay men and no Lesbian Women |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The day they legalize gay sex in Wisconsin is the day its hunters turn in their rifles for a glass of cranberry juice. What a ridiculous thing to say. Gay sex does not have to be "legalized." As far as I know there are no laws against it, at least laws that can be enforced. If Wisconsin still has any laws against what people can do in private con-sensually, they need to come into this century. And what does gay marriage have to do with cranberry juice? I'm confused. Everything you've said is ridiculous. Now, I can talk about my great state....what we need and don't need. You don't have any right. I don't have any right to do what? Talk about Wisconsin? I'm not really talking about Wisconsin in particular. Any state that still has any laws against what two consenting adults can do in private needs to come into this century. You are the one who brought Wisconsin into the subject of this thread. This thread is not about who you should be able to have sex with, its about SAME SEX MARRIAGE. You are so territorial.  You aren't very good at fallacies--strange since you use a list of them quite frequently. The topic is clearly about the goal of having every state cave in to others' views from different states. That is what is ridiculous. I vote in my state. You do not vote in my state. Get that through your head. Now, when you use words like "should" and "need", it leaves no room for any type of conceptualization whatsoever and everyone knows that's insane. So, instead of *****-footing around like a little girl, why don't you just go ahead and proclaim that you're just as biased and bigoted as anyone. You want people to think one thing, to see one thing, to end all thought and submit. That's never going to happen no matter what laws there are. Sorry, but that's just pure fantasy. People can think anything they want, no one is gonna say they can't, but what they CAN'T or at least SHOULDN'T be able to do is impact public policy and what a person can or can't do irrespective of them through those thoughts. No one should have a right to tell someone else how to live simply because they don't like it. That's where your right ends where theirs begin. It's really that simple. You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, but unless there is proof of harm to you directly, you cannot tell them to stop it or force them to. I don't agree with mainstream religion and churches, but I cannot tell you you can't be a part of them just because I disagree. We either live in a society where we ALL have rights or no one does, because once you allow one's to be taken away you open the door for yours to be taken as well. If we value our rights at all, we will protect them all not just the ones that suit us. Otherwise, we are asking for them to be removed completely. I'm not sure you realize fully why people take stances and vote. They exercise their rights as well as voicing their opinions with their own greater life prospects and so forth in mind. Not doing so does not indicate any type of acquiescence. This is not a society, it is a culture of many different societies. To think the entire country is of common means for common ends is incorrect. In this particular neck of the woods, we feel that the greatest thing to be protected is the traditional family.... the single greatest. By popular vote, we banned same-sex marriage. Seen? Rights. No one has true rights if someone else can take them away on a whim. Rights cannot be taken away, if they can be they are no longer rights. This is the flaw in a democratic society, it only protects those with the votes, it doesn't protect everyone. It's like a sheep and 2 wolves deciding what's for dinner, the lone sheep loses out. That's not the America, not the world I prefer to live in. What a person can or cannot do in their private lives should never come down to a vote. You even say it yourself, we are a culture of many different societies......why are we trying to force everyone to act according to one? Belonging to or for the use of one particular person or group of people only. : of, relating to, or affecting all the people or the whole area of a nation or state <public law>. b : of or relating to a government guess which one is the definition of 'private'? guess which one describes MARRIAGE,, which is related to GOVERNMENT,,,,? who defines marriage this way though? It's man's doing......and you can spare me the rhetoric that says otherwise. To try and make something like that for one group only is discriminating. its not for one group, it includes ALL PEOPLE unless they dont fall under either male or female...... which by the by some do NOT......but not withstanding that.....it cannot be truly for ALL if the ability to do it is dependent on a certain criteria, that is that it MUST be to the opposite sex to be valid. That just doesn't work, that discriminates against people who either choose not to marry their opposite (ie are bi), or who based on their biological attractions could not do it. If it's truly supposed to be for ALL than you cannot limit it based on a preference. It's not for all if you are doing so, only those it suits. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The day they legalize gay sex in Wisconsin is the day its hunters turn in their rifles for a glass of cranberry juice. What a ridiculous thing to say. Gay sex does not have to be "legalized." As far as I know there are no laws against it, at least laws that can be enforced. If Wisconsin still has any laws against what people can do in private con-sensually, they need to come into this century. And what does gay marriage have to do with cranberry juice? I'm confused. Everything you've said is ridiculous. Now, I can talk about my great state....what we need and don't need. You don't have any right. I don't have any right to do what? Talk about Wisconsin? I'm not really talking about Wisconsin in particular. Any state that still has any laws against what two consenting adults can do in private needs to come into this century. You are the one who brought Wisconsin into the subject of this thread. This thread is not about who you should be able to have sex with, its about SAME SEX MARRIAGE. You are so territorial. You aren't very good at fallacies--strange since you use a list of them quite frequently. The topic is clearly about the goal of having every state cave in to others' views from different states. That is what is ridiculous. I vote in my state. You do not vote in my state. Get that through your head. Now, when you use words like "should" and "need", it leaves no room for any type of conceptualization whatsoever and everyone knows that's insane. So, instead of *****-footing around like a little girl, why don't you just go ahead and proclaim that you're just as biased and bigoted as anyone. You want people to think one thing, to see one thing, to end all thought and submit. That's never going to happen no matter what laws there are. Sorry, but that's just pure fantasy. If you haven't noticed, take a look at the crime rate for my great state, then go ahead and make with that sarcastic laugh emoticon thingy. You're the one who doesn't even want gay people having sex, but you're calling someone else a bigot? When in the world did I ever say that? I didn't call her anything, she did. All I'm tearing at is.... mind your own state. Do I go barking at the people of Maryland demanding this and that? No. Why would it bother you so much if gay people were allowed to marry in your state? How is that affecting your life? and why do care what the people in Wisconsin do? you should worry about your own state, and then the gay's there can have all the butt sex they want... maybe people in Wisconsin don't feel the same way you do about gay butt sex... Personal feelings are irrelevant as it pertains to individual rights, they will win out every time. Unless something is affecting you SPECIFICALLY and your ability to live freely and do as you wish to do, you cannot take away someone elses' ability to live as they choose to. You may not like it, you may disagree with it, but you have no right to dictate or tell them they can't do something strictly based on that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
but we arent in Rome,,,, ,,,,and they never wore 'dresses'. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..those who oppose sodomy are somehow afraid of something,,, never quite figured that term out myself,,, both are accurate gay butt sex is more accurate than both.... anal sex doesn't imply gay, and neither does sodomy... since this thread is about gays, then gay butt sex is appropriate... No, this thread ISN'T about gays. It's about marriage equality for the human race. How you get off by throwing around the term butt sex is beyond me. Maybe you've tried it and like it?? no, it's about gays wanting to be gay... there is no such thing as marriage inequality... any man, gay or not, can marry any woman he wants... gays want extra rights, and to cram their lifestyle down everyone else's throat... sure...why wouldn't they? a world full of homos, great for the future... i think it all should be suppressed, not welcomed... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The day they legalize gay sex in Wisconsin is the day its hunters turn in their rifles for a glass of cranberry juice. What a ridiculous thing to say. Gay sex does not have to be "legalized." As far as I know there are no laws against it, at least laws that can be enforced. If Wisconsin still has any laws against what people can do in private con-sensually, they need to come into this century. And what does gay marriage have to do with cranberry juice? I'm confused. Everything you've said is ridiculous. Now, I can talk about my great state....what we need and don't need. You don't have any right. I don't have any right to do what? Talk about Wisconsin? I'm not really talking about Wisconsin in particular. Any state that still has any laws against what two consenting adults can do in private needs to come into this century. You are the one who brought Wisconsin into the subject of this thread. This thread is not about who you should be able to have sex with, its about SAME SEX MARRIAGE. You are so territorial. You aren't very good at fallacies--strange since you use a list of them quite frequently. The topic is clearly about the goal of having every state cave in to others' views from different states. That is what is ridiculous. I vote in my state. You do not vote in my state. Get that through your head. Now, when you use words like "should" and "need", it leaves no room for any type of conceptualization whatsoever and everyone knows that's insane. So, instead of *****-footing around like a little girl, why don't you just go ahead and proclaim that you're just as biased and bigoted as anyone. You want people to think one thing, to see one thing, to end all thought and submit. That's never going to happen no matter what laws there are. Sorry, but that's just pure fantasy. If you haven't noticed, take a look at the crime rate for my great state, then go ahead and make with that sarcastic laugh emoticon thingy. You're the one who doesn't even want gay people having sex, but you're calling someone else a bigot? When in the world did I ever say that? I didn't call her anything, she did. All I'm tearing at is.... mind your own state. Do I go barking at the people of Maryland demanding this and that? No. Why would it bother you so much if gay people were allowed to marry in your state? How is that affecting your life? and why do care what the people in Wisconsin do? you should worry about your own state, and then the gay's there can have all the butt sex they want... maybe people in Wisconsin don't feel the same way you do about gay butt sex... Personal feelings are irrelevant as it pertains to individual rights, they will win out every time. Unless something is affecting you SPECIFICALLY and your ability to live freely and do as you wish to do, you cannot take away someone elses' ability to live as they choose to. You may not like it, you may disagree with it, but you have no right to dictate or tell them they can't do something strictly based on that. i think i do... if they are making my life "uncomfortable" , then i have every right to voice my opinion and live "comfortably"... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The day they legalize gay sex in Wisconsin is the day its hunters turn in their rifles for a glass of cranberry juice. What a ridiculous thing to say. Gay sex does not have to be "legalized." As far as I know there are no laws against it, at least laws that can be enforced. If Wisconsin still has any laws against what people can do in private con-sensually, they need to come into this century. And what does gay marriage have to do with cranberry juice? I'm confused. Everything you've said is ridiculous. Now, I can talk about my great state....what we need and don't need. You don't have any right. I don't have any right to do what? Talk about Wisconsin? I'm not really talking about Wisconsin in particular. Any state that still has any laws against what two consenting adults can do in private needs to come into this century. You are the one who brought Wisconsin into the subject of this thread. This thread is not about who you should be able to have sex with, its about SAME SEX MARRIAGE. You are so territorial. You aren't very good at fallacies--strange since you use a list of them quite frequently. The topic is clearly about the goal of having every state cave in to others' views from different states. That is what is ridiculous. I vote in my state. You do not vote in my state. Get that through your head. Now, when you use words like "should" and "need", it leaves no room for any type of conceptualization whatsoever and everyone knows that's insane. So, instead of *****-footing around like a little girl, why don't you just go ahead and proclaim that you're just as biased and bigoted as anyone. You want people to think one thing, to see one thing, to end all thought and submit. That's never going to happen no matter what laws there are. Sorry, but that's just pure fantasy. If you haven't noticed, take a look at the crime rate for my great state, then go ahead and make with that sarcastic laugh emoticon thingy. You're the one who doesn't even want gay people having sex, but you're calling someone else a bigot? When in the world did I ever say that? I didn't call her anything, she did. All I'm tearing at is.... mind your own state. Do I go barking at the people of Maryland demanding this and that? No. Why would it bother you so much if gay people were allowed to marry in your state? How is that affecting your life? and why do care what the people in Wisconsin do? you should worry about your own state, and then the gay's there can have all the butt sex they want... maybe people in Wisconsin don't feel the same way you do about gay butt sex... Personal feelings are irrelevant as it pertains to individual rights, they will win out every time. Unless something is affecting you SPECIFICALLY and your ability to live freely and do as you wish to do, you cannot take away someone elses' ability to live as they choose to. You may not like it, you may disagree with it, but you have no right to dictate or tell them they can't do something strictly based on that. what rights? gay people have every right that i have here... they are not being told to not love each other, if that exists in gays, and marriage is not a "right"... face it, this is about money and nothing else... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..those who oppose sodomy are somehow afraid of something,,, never quite figured that term out myself,,, both are accurate gay butt sex is more accurate than both.... anal sex doesn't imply gay, and neither does sodomy... since this thread is about gays, then gay butt sex is appropriate... No, this thread ISN'T about gays. It's about marriage equality for the human race. How you get off by throwing around the term butt sex is beyond me. Maybe you've tried it and like it?? no, it's about gays wanting to be gay... there is no such thing as marriage inequality... any man, gay or not, can marry any woman he wants... gays want extra rights, and to cram their lifestyle down everyone else's throat... sure...why wouldn't they? a world full of homos, great for the future... i think it all should be suppressed, not welcomed... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..those who oppose sodomy are somehow afraid of something,,, never quite figured that term out myself,,, both are accurate gay butt sex is more accurate than both.... anal sex doesn't imply gay, and neither does sodomy... since this thread is about gays, then gay butt sex is appropriate... No, this thread ISN'T about gays. It's about marriage equality for the human race. How you get off by throwing around the term butt sex is beyond me. Maybe you've tried it and like it?? no, it's about gays wanting to be gay... there is no such thing as marriage inequality... any man, gay or not, can marry any woman he wants... gays want extra rights, and to cram their lifestyle down everyone else's throat... sure...why wouldn't they? a world full of homos, great for the future... i think it all should be suppressed, not welcomed... 8 billion people can't live the way they want to live... if they could, there would be no laws... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
mightymoe
on
Sun 05/12/13 05:27 PM
|
|
..those who oppose sodomy are somehow afraid of something,,, never quite figured that term out myself,,, both are accurate gay butt sex is more accurate than both.... anal sex doesn't imply gay, and neither does sodomy... since this thread is about gays, then gay butt sex is appropriate... No, this thread ISN'T about gays. It's about marriage equality for the human race. How you get off by throwing around the term butt sex is beyond me. Maybe you've tried it and like it?? no, it's about gays wanting to be gay... there is no such thing as marriage inequality... any man, gay or not, can marry any woman he wants... gays want extra rights, and to cram their lifestyle down everyone else's throat... sure...why wouldn't they? a world full of homos, great for the future... i think it all should be suppressed, not welcomed... and who does live the way they really want to live? --- nobody... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..those who oppose sodomy are somehow afraid of something,,, never quite figured that term out myself,,, both are accurate gay butt sex is more accurate than both.... anal sex doesn't imply gay, and neither does sodomy... since this thread is about gays, then gay butt sex is appropriate... No, this thread ISN'T about gays. It's about marriage equality for the human race. How you get off by throwing around the term butt sex is beyond me. Maybe you've tried it and like it?? no, it's about gays wanting to be gay... there is no such thing as marriage inequality... any man, gay or not, can marry any woman he wants... gays want extra rights, and to cram their lifestyle down everyone else's throat... sure...why wouldn't they? a world full of homos, great for the future... i think it all should be suppressed, not welcomed... 8 billion people can't live the way they want to live... if they could, there would be no laws... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The day they legalize gay sex in Wisconsin is the day its hunters turn in their rifles for a glass of cranberry juice. What a ridiculous thing to say. Gay sex does not have to be "legalized." As far as I know there are no laws against it, at least laws that can be enforced. If Wisconsin still has any laws against what people can do in private con-sensually, they need to come into this century. And what does gay marriage have to do with cranberry juice? I'm confused. Everything you've said is ridiculous. Now, I can talk about my great state....what we need and don't need. You don't have any right. I don't have any right to do what? Talk about Wisconsin? I'm not really talking about Wisconsin in particular. Any state that still has any laws against what two consenting adults can do in private needs to come into this century. You are the one who brought Wisconsin into the subject of this thread. This thread is not about who you should be able to have sex with, its about SAME SEX MARRIAGE. You are so territorial. You aren't very good at fallacies--strange since you use a list of them quite frequently. The topic is clearly about the goal of having every state cave in to others' views from different states. That is what is ridiculous. I vote in my state. You do not vote in my state. Get that through your head. Now, when you use words like "should" and "need", it leaves no room for any type of conceptualization whatsoever and everyone knows that's insane. So, instead of *****-footing around like a little girl, why don't you just go ahead and proclaim that you're just as biased and bigoted as anyone. You want people to think one thing, to see one thing, to end all thought and submit. That's never going to happen no matter what laws there are. Sorry, but that's just pure fantasy. If you haven't noticed, take a look at the crime rate for my great state, then go ahead and make with that sarcastic laugh emoticon thingy. You're the one who doesn't even want gay people having sex, but you're calling someone else a bigot? When in the world did I ever say that? I didn't call her anything, she did. All I'm tearing at is.... mind your own state. Do I go barking at the people of Maryland demanding this and that? No. Why would it bother you so much if gay people were allowed to marry in your state? How is that affecting your life? and why do care what the people in Wisconsin do? you should worry about your own state, and then the gay's there can have all the butt sex they want... maybe people in Wisconsin don't feel the same way you do about gay butt sex... Do you think banning gay marriage is going to stop people from having anal sex? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..those who oppose sodomy are somehow afraid of something,,, never quite figured that term out myself,,, both are accurate gay butt sex is more accurate than both.... anal sex doesn't imply gay, and neither does sodomy... since this thread is about gays, then gay butt sex is appropriate... Oh, so it's strictly anal sex between gay people that you don't want to happen. You're ok with anal arc between straight people. Got it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..those who oppose sodomy are somehow afraid of something,,, never quite figured that term out myself,,, both are accurate gay butt sex is more accurate than both.... anal sex doesn't imply gay, and neither does sodomy... since this thread is about gays, then gay butt sex is appropriate... No, this thread ISN'T about gays. It's about marriage equality for the human race. How you get off by throwing around the term butt sex is beyond me. Maybe you've tried it and like it?? no, it's about gays wanting to be gay... there is no such thing as marriage inequality... any man, gay or not, can marry any woman he wants... gays want extra rights, and to cram their lifestyle down everyone else's throat... man marry woman, woman marry man, seems pretty basic and inclusive of everyone,,, You want to force gay people to marry straight people if they want to get married? Why? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
nightwindcr
on
Sun 05/12/13 06:38 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about a kilt? Yes, kilts are sexy. No underwear. wow. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about a kilt? Yes, kilts are sexy. No underwear. wow. Did you look? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..those who oppose sodomy are somehow afraid of something,,, never quite figured that term out myself,,, both are accurate gay butt sex is more accurate than both.... anal sex doesn't imply gay, and neither does sodomy... since this thread is about gays, then gay butt sex is appropriate... No, this thread ISN'T about gays. It's about marriage equality for the human race. How you get off by throwing around the term butt sex is beyond me. Maybe you've tried it and like it?? no, it's about gays wanting to be gay... there is no such thing as marriage inequality... any man, gay or not, can marry any woman he wants... gays want extra rights, and to cram their lifestyle down everyone else's throat... man marry woman, woman marry man, seems pretty basic and inclusive of everyone,,, Are you saying that there are no gay men and no Lesbian Women cant put it more simply man can marry woman, woman can marry man ,,,,anyone that falls under category of man or woman is included in that 'right' |
|
|
|
|
