TX -- Big, bad john in tight race

[C.]

Then why doesn't the state prevent 80 year olds from marrying Or sterile men/women

In both cases they are *biological dead ends* ... but THEY are allowed to marry.

What interest does the state have in preventing normal, healthy relationships? As for childless couples, the state should not be forcing anyone to have children. It should, however, encourage reproduction at least at the replacement level.

On the other hand, the state has every interest in not legitimizing a perverse union of two men or two women. It has every interest in preventing the corruption of the most basic of social units. That might be why gay unions have never been legitimate in any human society. Indeed, societies much more open to homosexual behavior (ancient Greece, for instance, where such behavior was still often frowned upon contrary to the propaganda of homosexual activists) never considered the question of homosexual marriage. Why not?

Again, gay marriage is about social acceptance, not "rights". Stop kidding yourself.

Are you married, sir?

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

Then why doesn't the state prevent 80 year olds from marrying Or sterile men/women

In both cases they are *biological dead ends* ... but THEY are allowed to marry.

What interest does the state have in preventing normal, healthy relationships? As for childless couples, the state should not be forcing anyone to have children. It should, however, encourage reproduction at least at the replacement level.

On the other hand, the state has every interest in not legitimizing a perverse union of two men or two women. It has every interest in preventing the corruption of the most basic of social units. That might be why gay unions have never been legitimate in any human society. Indeed, societies much more open to homosexual behavior (ancient Greece, for instance, where such behavior was still often frowned upon contrary to the propaganda of homosexual activists) never considered the question of homosexual marriage. Why not?

Again, gay marriage is about social acceptance, not "rights". Stop kidding yourself.

Are you married, sir?

I am not, sir.

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

That is why I posted under the influence last night at 12:30AM. My tone was uncalled for and I apologize.

[gunit_sangh]

.

On the other hand, the state has every interest in not legitimizing a perverse union of two men or two women. It has every interest in preventing the corruption of the most basic of social units. That might be why gay unions have never been legitimate in any human society. Indeed, societies much more open to homosexual behavior (ancient Greece, for instance, where such behavior was still often frowned upon contrary to the propaganda of homosexual activists) never considered the question of homosexual marriage. Why not?

Again, gay marriage is about social acceptance, not "rights". Stop kidding yourself.

Perverse by whose standard From a gay standpoint, hetrosexual sex is perverse.

The preamble to our declaration of independence says that we are all entitiled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If happiness is two guys or gals wanting to form a union ... what right do you or the state have to deny them that

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

.

On the other hand, the state has every interest in not legitimizing a perverse union of two men or two women. It has every interest in preventing the corruption of the most basic of social units. That might be why gay unions have never been legitimate in any human society. Indeed, societies much more open to homosexual behavior (ancient Greece, for instance, where such behavior was still often frowned upon contrary to the propaganda of homosexual activists) never considered the question of homosexual marriage. Why not?

Again, gay marriage is about social acceptance, not "rights". Stop kidding yourself.

Perverse by whose standard From a gay standpoint, hetrosexual sex is perverse.

The preamble to our declaration of independence says that we are all entitiled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If happiness is two guys or gals wanting to form a union ... what right do you or the state have to deny them that

From a gay standpoint, hetrosexual sex is perverse.

This is a joke, right?

Homosexuals are free to do as they please but the state should not sanction a sexual abnormality. This is all so disingenuous anyway. Gays have no desire to marry in and for itself but rather to normalize their lifestyles. I'm not buying it and neither should you.

[Vermouth]

What interest does the state have in preventing normal, healthy relationships? As for childless couples, the state should not be forcing anyone to have children. It should, however, encourage reproduction at least at the replacement level.

On the other hand, the state has every interest in not legitimizing a perverse union of two men or two women. It has every interest in preventing the corruption of the most basic of social units. That might be why gay unions have never been legitimate in any human society. Indeed, societies much more open to homosexual behavior (ancient Greece, for instance, where such behavior was still often frowned upon contrary to the propaganda of homosexual activists) never considered the question of homosexual marriage. Why not?

Again, gay marriage is about social acceptance, not "rights". Stop kidding yourself.

Abandoned kids are better off being raised by a loving, stable homosexual couple than in a state orphanage. It's not ideal, but there are more kids out there than heterosexual couples willing to adopt them. An institution doesn't compare to a loving, stable family, flawed as it may be.

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

What interest does the state have in preventing normal, healthy relationships? As for childless couples, the state should not be forcing anyone to have children. It should, however, encourage reproduction at least at the replacement level.

On the other hand, the state has every interest in not legitimizing a perverse union of two men or two women. It has every interest in preventing the corruption of the most basic of social units. That might be why gay unions have never been legitimate in any human society. Indeed, societies much more open to homosexual behavior (ancient Greece, for instance, where such behavior was still often frowned upon contrary to the propaganda of homosexual activists) never considered the question of homosexual marriage. Why not?

Again, gay marriage is about social acceptance, not "rights". Stop kidding yourself.

Abandoned kids are better off being raised by a loving, stable homosexual couple than in a state orphanage. It's not ideal, but there are more kids out there than heterosexual couples willing to adopt them. An institution doesn't compare to a loving, stable family, flawed as it may be.

I'm inclined to agree. The most important thing is for the child in question to have a stable and loving home.

[C.]

What interest does the state have in preventing normal, healthy relationships? As for childless couples, the state should not be forcing anyone to have children. It should, however, encourage reproduction at least at the replacement level.

On the other hand, the state has every interest in not legitimizing a perverse union of two men or two women. It has every interest in preventing the corruption of the most basic of social units. That might be why gay unions have never been legitimate in any human society. Indeed, societies much more open to homosexual behavior (ancient Greece, for instance, where such behavior was still often frowned upon contrary to the propaganda of homosexual activists) never considered the question of homosexual marriage. Why not?

Again, gay marriage is about social acceptance, not "rights". Stop kidding yourself.

Abandoned kids are better off being raised by a loving, stable homosexual couple than in a state orphanage. It's not ideal, but there are more kids out there than heterosexual couples willing to adopt them. An institution doesn't compare to a loving, stable family, flawed as it may be.

I'm inclined to agree. The most important thing is for the child in question to have a stable and loving home.

Ditto.

[BIGTEX]

Homosexual relationships are not normal.

They are not healthy, either.

Ever heard of AIDS?

The overwhelming majority of persons in Western nations afflicted with that incurable disease are HOMOSEXUALS.  And that's not all.  Consult statistics with respect to hepatitis and all manner of venereal diseases.

The typical homosexual is little more than a factory harboring and churning out all manner of virulent pathogens.

[spunkloaf]

Homosexual relationships are not normal.

They are not healthy, either.

Ever heard of AIDS?

The overwhelming majority of persons in Western nations afflicted with that incurable disease are HOMOSEXUALS.  And that's not all.  Consult statistics with respect to hepatitis and all manner of venereal diseases.

The typical homosexual is little more than a factory harboring and churning out all manner of virulent pathogens.

Magnificent.  Way to go.

[C.]

Homosexual relationships are not normal.

They are not healthy, either.

Ever heard of AIDS?

The overwhelming majority of persons in Western nations afflicted with that incurable disease are HOMOSEXUALS.  And that's not all.  Consult statistics with respect to hepatitis and all manner of venereal diseases.

The typical homosexual is little more than a factory harboring and churning out all manner of virulent pathogens.

I'm sure your parents are very proud of what you've become: an online discussion board troll. Away with you, child.

[spunkloaf]

Homosexual relationships are not normal.

They are not healthy, either.

Ever heard of AIDS?

The overwhelming majority of persons in Western nations afflicted with that incurable disease are HOMOSEXUALS.  And that's not all.  Consult statistics with respect to hepatitis and all manner of venereal diseases.

The typical homosexual is little more than a factory harboring and churning out all manner of virulent pathogens.

I'm sure your parents are very proud of what you've become: an online discussion board troll. Away with you, child.

I still haven't decided if this guy is for real.  I didn't think somebody could exist who is that ignorant.

Surprisingly, there are those on this board who admire BigTex's racist opinions.

I won't say names D-wang.

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

homosexual relationships are not normal.  this was recognized by the apa as recently as the 1970's and was removed due to culture and the desire to sculpt society, not science.  homosexuality is the result of a psychosexual dysfunction that manifests itself in specific behavior.  as for disease and gay sex, i have no info on std levels and homosexuality, yet aids was early on referred to as grid....gay related immunodeficiency virus due to its prevalence within the gay community.     

[Mr. Dirlewanger]

Homosexual relationships are not normal.

They are not healthy, either.

Ever heard of AIDS?

The overwhelming majority of persons in Western nations afflicted with that incurable disease are HOMOSEXUALS.  And that's not all.  Consult statistics with respect to hepatitis and all manner of venereal diseases.

The typical homosexual is little more than a factory harboring and churning out all manner of virulent pathogens.

I'm sure your parents are very proud of what you've become: an online discussion board troll. Away with you, child.

I still haven't decided if this guy is for real.  I didn't think somebody could exist who is that ignorant.

Surprisingly, there are those on this board who admire BigTex's racist opinions.

I won't say names D-wang.

For real? Well, as Grumpy said, even if BIGTEX has overstated his case his assertions that homosexuality is not normal and that homosexual behavior is unhealthy are largely correct. What is that you disagreed with? What comments did you think were ignorant? Could it be that, like all liberals, you demand that the truth be packaged in ways that leave feelings unhurt?

[Soviet America]

Love is not a disorder.