Judicial Activism Loves The Gays

[Spurminator]

We need a sarcastic "lol" smiley

One that basically says "Der herr herrr!"

[ChumpDumper]

They simply can't logically get around the beastiality analogy.

They will try to argue that it can't be a real relationship because the animal can't choose to be in the relationship.

Thats hypocrisy at it's finest.

The double beef patties in their burger today didn't choose to be their lunch but they ate the fuckers anyway, choice or no choice.When you can get a cow to sign his or her name legibly on legal documents such as marriage applications after that cow has read and understood the terms of the document, I will support man-cow marriage.

[ChumpDumper]

Just to refresh your memory, here is Manny's definition of marriage...




I can clearly see that YOU couldn't pass an LSAT. And yes, my son is an attorney, and yes, we have many free wheeling discussions on politics, the law, and current events and have since he was very young.I did pretty well on the LSAT when I took it. I don't think the writers of that test would have accepted this logic:

Legally speaking, all marriages are contracts.

Therefore, all contracts are marriages.

Just a hunch. It would be a nice true/false question to use to weed out the hopeless applicants rather quickly.

[CosmicCowboy]

I did pretty well on the LSAT when I took it. I don't think the writers of that test would have accepted this logic:

Legally speaking, all marriages are contracts.

Therefore, all contracts are marriages.

Just a hunch. It would be a nice true/false question to use to weed out the hopeless applicants rather quickly.

Ahhh the A team has arrived to bail out the hopelessly stupid.

As someone who has been married for 30 years senility has obviously robbed me of the memory of the marriage contract I signed.

I'm sure things have changed since then. Please post a copy of the current contract that people in Texas are required to sign now when they agree to get "married".

Whatever "married" means now.

Manny's definition was painfully vague.

[Spurminator]

Ahhh the A team has arrived to bail out the hopelessly stupid.

I know you are but what am I?

[ChumpDumper]

Ahhh the A team has arrived to bail out the hopelessly stupid.

As someone who has been married for 30 years senility has obviously robbed me of the memory of the marriage contract I signed.

I'm sure things have changed since then. Please post a copy of the current contract that people in Texas are required to sign now when they agree to get "married".

Whatever "married" means now.

Manny's definition was painfully vague.You've never heard of a marriage license?

The contents thereof are easily found in the Texas Family Code.

And seriously -- where does one go for an official divorce?

Church?

Or a court?

[MannyIsGod]

Painfully vague?

If I caused you pain then I am most pleased. :)

[LnGrrrR]

Allowing a white man or a black man to marry a white woman or black woman does not change the definition of marriage.

It's still man-woman.

Thanks for playing.

The definition of marriage, and what it entails, has changed throughout history.

In fact, the way marriage is viewed nowadays would make our ancestors gasp. Women choosing their partner?

Thanks for playing.

[George Gervin's Afro]

People go into prison straight and some come out gay and keep being gay. They are not born gay. They learned to be gay. Just saying.

I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that many of these encounters aren't of a consensual variety...

prison sex jack?

[jack sommerset]

I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that many of these encounters aren't of a consensual variety...

prison sex jack?

Atleast we know half of them are.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Atleast we know half of them are.

jack your KILLING me..:lmao

[Jacob1983]

So who do you picture at the altar at a wedding? It would be interesting to ask that question to a random group of people that consisted of let's say 100 particpants. I would say that a majority of those participants would probably say "a man and a woman".

We all know that animals cannot give consent and kids can't either. However, what is the argument against polygamous marriages? Let's say that all people participating in polygamous marriages have to be of legal age, have to consent, can't be abused and brainwashed, and no incest can be involved in it either.

[CuckingFunt]

So who do you picture at the altar at a wedding? It would be interesting to ask that question to a random group of people that consisted of let's say 100 particpants. I would say that a majority of those participants would probably say "a man and a woman".

A group of 100 people would also be more likely to recognize a picture of Julia Roberts than of Katharine Hepburn, but it doesn't mean that only one of them is an actress.

[Supergirl]

So who do you picture at the altar at a wedding? It would be interesting to ask that question to a random group of people that consisted of let's say 100 particpants. I would say that a majority of those participants would probably say "a man and a woman".

We all know that animals cannot give consent and kids can't either. However, what is the argument against polygamous marriages? Let's say that all people participating in polygamous marriages have to be of legal age, have to consent, can't be abused and brainwashed, and no incest can be involved in it either.

As the judge wrote in his decision, the fact that a majority of people in California voted for Prop 8 is IRRELEVANT to the decision. Rights are not things you put up to a vote. That's what makes them RIGHTS.

[Jacob1983]

So what's the argument against polygamy? I've heard some people say it's a money issue. Polygamous married couples would have an easier time with taxes than monogamous married couples. If states can vote on whether or not they want casinos, then why can't they vote on marriage? Don't states have rights? Weed is legal is some states but illegal in others. Why not put it to a vote? Oh wait, California did that but a certain group/demographic didn't like the results and bitched about it until they got their way.

[redzero]

So, what I take from this thread is that sheep should be able to marry cows or something.

[Winehole23]

So, what I take from this thread is that sheep should be able to marry cows or something. Yep. Board socialcons widely agree gay marriage leads directly to bestiality.

[Jacob1983]

How come states can vote on gambling and weed but can't vote on marriage? Where is the outrage? A person should be allowed to smoke marijuana for medicinal and recreational purposes in every state. A person should also be allowed to gamble in a casino in every state. Why the rights of gamblers and marijuana users being violated in certain states? This is bigotry and discrimination.

[Winehole23]

In a way, such a view represents evolution toward a more liberal mindset: used to be, social conservatives held that homosexuality itself led to it.

[Supergirl]

How come states can vote on gambling and weed but can't vote on marriage? Where is the outrage? A person should be allowed to smoke marijuana for medicinal and recreational purposes in every state. A person should also be allowed to gamble in a casino in every state. Why the rights of gamblers and marijuana users being violated in certain states? This is bigotry and discrimination.

Well, there's no law granting people the right to gamble or smoke marijuana, and there is a law granting people the right the get married, and giving hundreds of rights along with that right. The equivalent scenario would be if we passed a law saying only white people could smoke marijuana, or only gay people could gamble. That would be discrimination.

That being said, I'm not in favor of passing laws regulating what people can do with their time. I think casinos and marijuana should be legal- and I think they should be taxed to raise money for the state.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I think casinos and marijuana should be legal- and I think they should be taxed to raise money for the state.

A woman after my own heart...

[CosmicCowboy]

That being said, I'm not in favor of passing laws regulating what people can do with their time. I think casinos and marijuana should be legal- and I think they should be taxed to raise money for the state.

agreed

[coyotes_geek]

So, what I take from this thread is that sheep should be able to marry cows or something.

If a sheep and a cow can prove their consent to a judge then they can get married too. I'm going to need something more than "one moo means yes, two moos means no" though.

[jack sommerset]

A cow and sheep shouldn't need consent from anyone. Let them marry each other if they want to.

Now for you beastility freaks. If a dog is humping George's leg and George decides to pull his pants down, bends over and lets the dog have full access his brown eye: I ask you is that cruel to the dog.

[Spurminator]

Cows and sheep can't file taxes jointly. You can call them spouses all you want, just like Jack can call all of his gerbils his wives in his own poly-bestial home, but that doesn't mean the government will ever recognize them as such.

[jack sommerset]

Cows and sheep can't file taxes jointly. You can call them spouses all you want, just like Jack can call all of his gerbils his wives in his own poly-bestial home, but that doesn't mean the government will ever recognize them as such.

Well, that's not right.

[Spurminator]

Tough.

[rjv]

What I said :

1) Lust is not an emotional connection like love.

That does not = "MiamiHeat said lust is not an emotion"

so then how do they differ? all you will offer is a blanket statement indicating that they are dissimilar. how? which part of the brain do you know to be in control of emotions such as love and then where would you place the emotion of lust? i can only assume that you are now indicating love to be a higher order emotion and lust to be a base emotion. would the latter be based in the hypothalamus? would you then have to consider that the two classifications of emotion are physiologically separated?


In your world, it might be.

The sacred trinity (Father, Mother, Child) is an ideal shared by billions of people, even if it takes on different forms among cultures and religions. It is the nucleus of the family, the foundation of love, human civilization, everything we know. And no, I don't mean "Father, Mother, Child" in some religious way, does not pertain to any god. It's the human sacred trinity, the family.

clarifying that your language was not intended to be religious does not make it any less metaphysical. at best, you have indicated that at some point in human society the family unit became necessary. now, on an anthropological/evolutionary level that makes sense and is more objective but to use language such as "sacred trinity" is absolutely metaphysical, whether you wish to categorize it as religous or not. also, are the same variables at work today that initially drove to create the family unit and if so what are they? are they universally or categorically as imperative as they were at their genesis ?


and my comments about human sexuality are not really conjecture. Our brains actually do release certain chemicals to reward sexual experiences. Evolution's way to encourage reproduction.

so is human behavior (all of it) a mere byproduct of evolution? you are clearly stating that there is "free will" here by operating under the definition of "choice" when it comes to homosexuality but your free will appears to be one that is nature deep. that is, humans have developed altruism in a need to survive and thus anomalies such as homosexuality interfere with the surival of the fittest paradigm.

but this model took some exponential steps as of the 90's and we no longer really operate under such simplistic operatives, do we? the human genome project showed us that RNA plays as crucial a role in our development as does DNA and that there can be complex changes in gene expression throughout the brain, over time scales ranging from hours to decades. that is, our genes do not just determine the blueprint for an infant’s brain; they are working actively throughout our lives.

also, there is no one single evolutionary theory that applies to human nature although you seem to think there is one exclusive and universally accepted model. some game theory applications to social behavior have demonstrated that the reward to sexual initimacy is actually teamwork amongst animals. this makes sense in the context of the evolutionary framework that indicates natural selection is based on competition amongst individuals.

if you want to confine the complexities of human behavior to such limited parameters so be it but the research that is out there is so vast and incomplete that there is no way you could be categorical about it. if anything, the research that is out there to this point would more likely point in the opposite direction.

[Blake]

Yep. Board socialcons widely agree gay marriage leads directly to bestiality.

which might lead to sheep trying to adopt.

[Marcus Bryant]

That being said, I'm not in favor of passing laws regulating what people can do with their time. I think casinos and marijuana should be legal- and I think they should be taxed to raise money for the state.

Fuck the state.

[LnGrrrR]

which might lead to sheep trying to adopt.

Sheep adoption is one thing, but sheep adopting COWS? It's IMMORAL!

[MiamiHeat]

so then how do they differ? all you will offer is a blanket statement indicating that they are dissimilar. how? which part of the brain do you know to be in control of emotions such as love and then where would you place the emotion of lust? i can only assume that you are now indicating love to be a higher order emotion and lust to be a base emotion. would the latter be based in the hypothalamus? would you then have to consider that the two classifications of emotion are physiologically separated?

The human race has already done a pretty good job of defining the differences between lust and love in a physiological and, more importantly, psychological way.




clarifying that your language was not intended to be religious does not make it any less metaphysical. at best, you have indicated that at some point in human society the family unit became necessary. now, on an anthropological/evolutionary level that makes sense and is more objective but to use language such as "sacred trinity" is absolutely metaphysical, whether you wish to categorize it as religous or not. also, are the same variables at work today that initially drove to create the family unit and if so what are they? are they universally or categorically as imperative as they were at their genesis ?

dictionary.com entry for word : sacred

4. reverently dedicated to some person, purpose, or object: a morning hour sacred to study.
5. regarded with reverence: the sacred memory of a dead hero.
6. secured against violation, infringement, etc., as by reverence or sense of right: sacred oaths; sacred rights.
7. properly immune from violence, interference, etc., as a person or office.


I'd like to point them out : secured against violation and infringement, properly immune from interference, regarded with reverence.

Not associated in any religious or spiritual way.

The family unit, the trio, the three amigos, the TRINITY, is sacred and needs to be preserved. It is no coincidence that all religions around the world used the family unit as a basis for their celestial gods and stories.






so is human behavior (all of it) a mere byproduct of evolution? you are clearly stating that there is "free will" here by operating under the definition of "choice" when it comes to homosexuality but your free will appears to be one that is nature deep. that is, humans have developed altruism in a need to survive and thus anomalies such as homosexuality interfere with the surival of the fittest paradigm.

Homosexuals are not anomalies. They are people who have decided to sexually satisfy themselves in a different way. It is the same thing as a monkey who discovers a frog, plays with it, then gets the idea to fuck it in the mouth (youtube video lol). The monkey realizes he can do this for sexual gratification. He wasn't "born that way" ... evolution wired us to reproduce with females. Not frogs, or men-men, women-women. It's a farce.

In my opinion, it is clear as day that homosexuals are well organized, such as the LGBT. They clearly have meetings (have seen them on video, no joke) on how to gain social acceptance, manipulate the legislative branch, how to become more socially acceptable to the population, etc. I have seen it with my own eyes.

They (LGBT, etc) clearly realized that saying "we are born that way" is the road to becoming a victim, and America loves it's victims.

This country lost it's balls a long time ago. Anyone with a sob story who cries out victim gets coddled and protected by the Blanket of Political Correctness.

[rjv]

The human race has already done a pretty good job of defining the differences between lust and love in a physiological and, more importantly, psychological way.

sorry, but to me this is merely an amorphous response that says nothing. i asked for you to specify the regions of the brain that control these aspects of behavior.





dictionary.com entry for word : sacred

4. reverently dedicated to some person, purpose, or object: a morning hour sacred to study.
5. regarded with reverence: the sacred memory of a dead hero.
6. secured against violation, infringement, etc., as by reverence or sense of right: sacred oaths; sacred rights.
7. properly immune from violence, interference, etc., as a person or office.


I'd like to point them out : secured against violation and infringement, properly immune from interference, regarded with reverence.

Not associated in any religious or spiritual way.

The family unit, the trio, the three amigos, the TRINITY, is sacred and needs to be preserved. It is no coincidence that all religions around the world used the family unit as a basis for their celestial gods and stories.

since you have the dictionary out at this time, go ahead and look up 'metaphysics'.



Homosexuals are not anomalies. They are people who have decided to sexually satisfy themselves in a different way. It is the same thing as a monkey who discovers a frog, plays with it, then gets the idea to fuck it in the mouth (youtube video lol). The monkey realizes he can do this for sexual gratification. He wasn't "born that way" ... evolution wired us to reproduce with females. Not frogs, or men-men, women-women. It's a farce.

In my opinion, it is clear as day that homosexuals are well organized, such as the LGBT. They clearly have meetings (have seen them on video, no joke) on how to gain social acceptance, manipulate the legislative branch, how to become more socially acceptable to the population, etc. I have seen it with my own eyes.

They (LGBT, etc) clearly realized that saying "we are born that way" is the road to becoming a victim, and America loves it's victims.

This country lost it's balls a long time ago. Anyone with a sob story who cries out victim gets coddled and protected by the Blanket of Political Correctness.

again, modern day genetics is not always about "hard wiring" and neural plasticity is clearly another example of how behavior is not a static attribute. those advocates and opponents of theories regarding a "gay gene" are off base when they think that the only way in which to discuss homosexual behavior is in this context. that is the direction i was attempting to point this discussion in but apparently, fMRI imaging, brain mapping and all the other research in the field of neuroscience are no match for youtube.

[MiamiHeat]

Instincts are hard wired. You know them by default. Granted, instinct research is still young, so no need to point it out.

We all know how to have sex without ever being taught how.

You know how to breathe, you are not taught how to do it.

and, actually, there is significant research that has shown evolution does hard wire male brains to pursue females. That part of the brain is almost 3 times bigger in the male brain, and we are specifically wired to interact with each other.

For instance, did you know that when a female is pregnant, she emits pheromones that drastically reduces the amount of testosterone in a male? This is so he will not find another mate and help raise the family.

You are in denial if you think males are not hard wired to mate with females.

This is who we are. Homosexuals are confused, whiny perverts who want all of us to accept their sexual perversion. They simply do not want to accept WHO THEY ARE, while at the same time trying to damage our culture and way of life by legitimizing a perverse union.

[Supergirl]

We all know how to have sex without ever being taught how.



this tells me you suck as a lover. anyone who says this has no idea what they are doing in bed.



and, actually, there is significant research that has shown evolution does hard wire male brains to pursue females. That part of the brain is almost 3 times bigger in the male brain, and we are specifically wired to interact with each other.

For instance, did you know that when a female is pregnant, she emits pheromones that drastically reduces the amount of testosterone in a male? This is so he will not find another mate and help raise the family.

You are in denial if you think males are not hard wired to mate with females.

This is who we are. Homosexuals are confused, whiny perverts who want all of us to accept their sexual perversion. They simply do not want to accept WHO THEY ARE.



and this tells me you are one big closet case. I am sorry, but you are full of shit and terrified of your own sexuality. Face up to it. Deal with it.

Sexuality *is* hardwired, that is true. What gets us off gets us off. But there is SO MUCH EVIDENCE out there (if, you know, you actually felt like doing an honest research investigation) that homosexual behavior is quite common in all levels of the animal kingdom, in all societies throughout time.

The prohibition against homosexuality in most cultures in the world comes from misogyny. It's about controlling women's sexuality through rigid gender binaries that are completely and totally artificial.

I don't expect you to believe me when I say this. You are clearly a closet case and deeply in denial. But I can't stand by and let someone spew ridiculous statements ALL the time. Sometimes I can't help myself and I have to jump in, even though I know it's futile.

For your own mental health I truly hope you come out of the closet some day, like I do for all the other closet case wingbats out there who get busted with their "rent boys" in the Miami airport.

[MiamiHeat]

this tells me you suck as a lover. anyone who says this has no idea what they are doing in bed.



and this tells me you are one big closet case. I am sorry, but you are full of shit and terrified of your own sexuality. Face up to it. Deal with it.

Sexuality *is* hardwired, that is true. What gets us off gets us off. But there is SO MUCH EVIDENCE out there (if, you know, you actually felt like doing an honest research investigation) that homosexual behavior is quite common in all levels of the animal kingdom, in all societies throughout time.

The prohibition against homosexuality in most cultures in the world comes from misogyny. It's about controlling women's sexuality through rigid gender binaries that are completely and totally artificial.

I don't expect you to believe me when I say this. You are clearly a closet case and deeply in denial. But I can't stand by and let someone spew ridiculous statements ALL the time. Sometimes I can't help myself and I have to jump in, even though I know it's futile.

For your own mental health I truly hope you come out of the closet some day, like I do for all the other closet case wingbats out there who get busted with their "rent boys" in the Miami airport.

The last resort of the retarded, confused hippie.

"OMG U DISAGREE? MUST BE CUZ UR HIDING GAY THOUGHTS"

When they have no argument left, just accuse the opposition of being crazy or lying.

http://www.w3bbo.com/forums/Stop-Being_a_dumbass.jpg

[Supergirl]

The last resort of the retarded, confused hippie.

"OMG U DISAGREE? MUST BE CUZ UR HIDING GAY THOUGHTS"

It's not because you disagree. Lots of people here say things with which I disagree. It's because your feelings about gay people are so strong, so deeply disturbed, that the only way that a person comes to be that way is as result of deep self-hatred.

But like I said, I don't expect you to believe me. Maybe you will in 10 years, when you aren't filled with self-loathing.

[MiamiHeat]

oh and how could I miss this


this tells me you suck as a lover. anyone who says this has no idea what they are doing in bed.

Apparently, my comment about humans having the instinct to have sex, means I was just content with that and never went out of my way to learn anything, or more specifically, learn what my partner likes :lol

now to look for another "dumbass" picture...

[MiamiHeat]

It's not because you disagree. Lots of people here say things with which I disagree. It's because your feelings about gay people are so strong, so deeply disturbed, that the only way that a person comes to be that way is as result of deep self-hatred.

But like I said, I don't expect you to believe me. Maybe you will in 10 years, when you aren't filled with self-loathing.

buahahahahaha

All people opposed to homosexuality = closet homo's according to SuperGirl.

I've seen people use this sad, sad, statement before on other people.

CAREFUL GUYZ, I MIGHT SAY I HATE GOLF, BUT I AM PROBABLY PLAY GOLF IN SECRET !! TIS NOT POSSIBLE TO NOT AGREE WITH SOMETHINS!!

[MiamiHeat]

Yeah, arguing with SuperGirl is kind of dumb. I could find more productive objects while scratching my ass.

Shame on me.

[Jacob1983]

Texas should have casinos. I've always thought it was stupid that Texas doesn't have them but it wouldn't surprise me at all if Texas secretly got a small portion of the money from casinos in Oklahoma.

[ChuckD]

buahahahahaha

All people opposed to homosexuality = closet homo's according to SuperGirl.

I've seen people use this sad, sad, statement before on other people.

CAREFUL GUYZ, I MIGHT SAY I HATE GOLF, BUT I AM PROBABLY PLAY GOLF IN SECRET !! TIS NOT POSSIBLE TO NOT AGREE WITH SOMETHINS!!

Actually, it's QFT. Any basic college Psych course will go into areas like repression.

[George Gervin's Afro]

This is who we are. Homosexuals are confused, whiny perverts who want all of us to accept their sexual perversion. They simply do not want to accept WHO THEY ARE, while at the same time trying to damage our culture and way of life by legitimizing a perverse union.

Why don't you take a poll and ask gay people if they are confused? Should be pretty simple to do.

[CosmicCowboy]

buahahahahaha

All people opposed to homosexuality = closet homo's according to SuperGirl.

I've seen people use this sad, sad, statement before on other people.

CAREFUL GUYZ, I MIGHT SAY I HATE GOLF, BUT I AM PROBABLY PLAY GOLF IN SECRET !! TIS NOT POSSIBLE TO NOT AGREE WITH SOMETHINS!!

MH, might as well give this one up. You are clearly a bigot if you disagree with them.

[Spurminator]

:lol You think it's his disagreement that makes him a bigot?

[George Gervin's Afro]

:lol You think it's his disagreement that makes him a bigot?

CC is not the brightest guy on the board..

[MiamiHeat]

CC is not the brightest guy on the board..

Disagreeing with your opinion = grounds to question CC's intelligence

nice going there Afro.

[CosmicCowboy]

CC is not the brightest guy on the board..

Actually, I always tested 99 percentile, was a National Merit Quarter Finalist, and popped a 1430 out of 1600 on the SAT. Also got an offer to the Air Force Academy but declined. Graduated in 4 years with a hybrid Architectural/Civil Engineering degree with 148 hours and a 3.7 average.

Just because I don't agree with your left wing knee jerk political dogma doesn't make me stupid.

[MiamiHeat]

:lol You think it's his disagreement that makes him a bigot?

Oh no, a label.

Calling me a bigot because I don't agree with homosexual marriage.

If THOSE are the terms for calling someone a bigot, then you do realize that EVERY SINGLE person who has their own opinion and disagrees with another, is subject to being classified as a bigot?

dictionary entry for : bigot

–noun
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

-----

Apparently, opposing homosexual marriage means I am utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

If those are the grounds, then ANYONE with a dissenting opinion ON ANY TOPIC relating to human behavior, is a bigot.

Person 1 : "I don't agree with your xyz"

Retarded Hippie : "You're a bigot!!"

[George Gervin's Afro]

Actually, I always tested 99 percentile, was a National Merit Quarter Finalist, and popped a 1430 out of 1600 on the SAT. Also got an offer to the Air Force Academy but declined. Graduated in 4 years with a hybrid Architectural/Civil Engineering degree with 148 hours and a 3.7 average.

Just because I don't agree with your left wing knee jerk political dogma doesn't make me stupid.

That makes makes the both of us.

[Spurminator]

:lol You think it's his disagreement that makes him a bigot?


Oh no, a label.

Calling me a bigot because I don't agree with homosexual marriage.

:lol My bad, you're also an idiot.

[MiamiHeat]

In that case,

Spurminator, you're a bigot for not tolerating my opinion.

Thanks.

[Spurminator]

I know you're trolling, so don't interpret this as my taking you any more seriously than it merits, but for the benefit of others, here's an example of what makes you a bigot.


Homosexuals are confused, whiny perverts who want all of us to accept their sexual perversion. They simply do not want to accept WHO THEY ARE, while at the same time trying to damage our culture and way of life by legitimizing a perverse union.

Sort of goes beyond disagreeing with gay marriage.

[MiamiHeat]

I know you're trolling, so don't interpret this as my taking you any more seriously than it merits, but for the benefit of others, here's an example of what makes you a bigot.



Sort of goes beyond disagreeing with gay marriage.

No, I'm serious.

and? The thread is about homosexual marriage.

I'm still allowed to discuss my beliefs about homosexuals in general if RJV is looking for a discussion. After all, it's kind of closely tied as to why I don't accept homosexual marriages in the first place. I was asked about it, and I gave my opinion. If you don't tolerate my opinion, you're a bigot.

[Spurminator]

Nuh uh!

[MiamiHeat]

Nuh uh!

You can go down the childish path if you like

Only makes yourself look bad

[Spurminator]

:lol

[MiamiHeat]

:lol

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l1nvgwDZxJ1qzun5no1_500.jpg

If you have nothing to contribute, then go away.

Bigot.

[clambake]

the inability to understand their attraction is the confusion that triggers your primal fear.

[MannyIsGod]

:lol You think it's his disagreement that makes him a bigot?

CC also thinks assuming Michelle Obama going to one of Spain's biggest tourist sites is going on a Black Pride History tour. Take his comments for what they are worth.

[clambake]

CC also thinks assuming Michelle Obama going to one of Spain's biggest tourist sites is going on a Black Pride History tour. Take his comments for what they are worth.

didn't you hear? cc is the forums 2nd 99%er.

[MannyIsGod]

I read that and I actually LOLed. Not because its funny when someone does that, but that its funny that he and WC both felt the need to bring it up.

[MiamiHeat]

the inability to understand their attraction is the confusion that triggers your primal fear.

lol no u

[clambake]

not everyone can evolve.

[Blake]

lol no u

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l1nvgwDZxJ1qzun5no1_500.jpg

If you have nothing to contribute, then go away.

Bigot.

[CosmicCowboy]

I read that and I actually LOLed. Not because its funny when someone does that, but that its funny that he and WC both felt the need to bring it up.

I'm so happy that you LOL'd. I'm sure you laugh hilariously at SpongeBob too.

It was a simple statement of fact.

I'm tired of the intellectual lightweights in here accusing me of being stupid just because I don't automatically agree with the progressive bullshit you constantly spew.

[clambake]

cowboy watches spongebob. lol

[Blake]

I'm so happy that you LOL'd. I'm sure you laugh hilariously at SpongeBob too.

It was a simple statement of fact.

I'm tired of the intellectual lightweights in here accusing me of being stupid just because I don't automatically agree with the progressive bullshit you constantly spew.

I didn't realize that engineering degrees that were given out in those days also came with a side of poli sci expertise.

Learn something new every day....

[CosmicCowboy]

cowboy watches spongebob. lol

A typical leap of progressive logic.

[Supergirl]

buahahahahaha

All people opposed to homosexuality = closet homo's according to SuperGirl.



well, history is certainly on my side with this one.

Ever see the documentary Outraged? It talks about the phenomenon of anti-gay politicians being exposed to be gay themselves.

How about this recent list that I just discovered today?
http://nuffy.net/articles/top-10-anti-gay-activists-caught-being-gay.html

It makes sense, if you know anything about psychology. Why would someone be SO UPSET by what other people do in the privacy of their own homes, if they weren't projecting their own fear and self-hatred onto them? Most heterosexual people fall in two categories: Totally comfortable with glbt people, don't care, or not totally comfortable but can have a reasonable conversation about how that discomfort should not be translated into legal restrictions which limit another human being's civil rights. Many of the people in this second category are Christians, who understand that Christianity teaches love, tolerance, and acceptance of people who are different from you.

The third class of person, who actively rails about how "evil" or "wrong" homosexuality is, who campaigns to limit citizens' civil rights, that person clearly has some issues. And in many, many cases that "issue" turns out to be that said person is a big ole closet case.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm so happy that you LOL'd. I'm sure you laugh hilariously at SpongeBob too.

It was a simple statement of fact.

I'm tired of the intellectual lightweights in here accusing me of being stupid just because I don't automatically agree with the progressive bullshit you constantly spew.

:lol

And yeah, saying I was in the 99th percentile in FILL IN THE BLANK TEST is going to really prove those people wrong, CC.

I'm sure everyone who considered you stupid before now considers you a genius. If you believe you're smart, then let your posts stand on their own merit.

[MiamiHeat]

I'm so happy that you LOL'd. I'm sure you laugh hilariously at SpongeBob too.

It was a simple statement of fact.

I'm tired of the intellectual lightweights in here accusing me of being stupid just because I don't automatically agree with the progressive bullshit you constantly spew.

MannyIsGod spends a lot of his posting time at ST insulting other members, this is nothing new.

[clambake]

MannyIsGod spends a lot of his posting time at ST insulting other members, this is nothing new.

:lol did you read the post you quoted?

[MiamiHeat]

well, history is certainly on my side with this one.

Ever see the documentary Outraged? It talks about the phenomenon of anti-gay politicians being exposed to be gay themselves.

How about this recent list that I just discovered today?
http://nuffy.net/articles/top-10-anti-gay-activists-caught-being-gay.html

It makes sense, if you know anything about psychology. Why would someone be SO UPSET by what other people do in the privacy of their own homes, if they weren't projecting their own fear and self-hatred onto them? Most heterosexual people fall in two categories: Totally comfortable with glbt people, don't care, or not totally comfortable but can have a reasonable conversation about how that discomfort should not be translated into legal restrictions which limit another human being's civil rights. Many of the people in this second category are Christians, who understand that Christianity teaches love, tolerance, and acceptance of people who are different from you.

The third class of person, who actively rails about how "evil" or "wrong" homosexuality is, who campaigns to limit citizens' civil rights, that person clearly has some issues. And in many, many cases that "issue" turns out to be that said person is a big ole closet case.

Yes, WHY ELSE would anyone disagree.

WHY OH WHY!

This sort of hilarious logic can be used on anything.

Why are you such a bigot towards my disagreement on homosexual marriage?

Could it be that you secretly agree with me? I hope one day, you will come out of of the closet and say what you truly feel about homosexuals. You agree with me in secret. WHY ELSE would you be so opposed to my beliefs?


Hey, that's easy. I see why you use it. If you have no argument on the actual subject, and you can't provide any actual discussion to the things presented, just question the motives behind it and dismiss the person as crazy or a liar.

Phew!

[MannyIsGod]

MannyIsGod spends a lot of his posting time at ST insulting other members, this is nothing new.

LOL if CC or anyone else took that post as an insult.

[MiamiHeat]

:lol did you read the post you quoted?

lol no u


CC also thinks assuming Michelle Obama going to one of Spain's biggest tourist sites is going on a Black Pride History tour. Take his comments for what they are worth.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm sorry for using CC's own words to qualify his views. I guess using your own words against you is a horrendous insult.

[rjv]

Instincts are hard wired. You know them by default. Granted, instinct research is still young, so no need to point it out.

We all know how to have sex without ever being taught how.

You know how to breathe, you are not taught how to do it.

and, actually, there is significant research that has shown evolution does hard wire male brains to pursue females. That part of the brain is almost 3 times bigger in the male brain, and we are specifically wired to interact with each other.

For instance, did you know that when a female is pregnant, she emits pheromones that drastically reduces the amount of testosterone in a male? This is so he will not find another mate and help raise the family.

You are in denial if you think males are not hard wired to mate with females.

this is not about whether or not sex is hard wired. it is about why you seem to think that homosexuality is not or could not be. if evolution has created a reward aspect to sex in order to ensure reproduction then why could not this same mechanism generate side effects or other aspects of adaptive or advantageous behavior when it comes to sex?

this is not about a gay gene. i have already indicated that there are studies regarding neural plasticity and RNA. these studies could shed some light on findings supporting a a neuroendocrine predisposition for homosexuality. or even on the fMRI imaging findings that showed a marked difference in the symmetry of the brain of homosexuals and heterosexuals.



This is who we are. Homosexuals are confused, whiny perverts who want all of us to accept their sexual perversion. They simply do not want to accept WHO THEY ARE, while at the same time trying to damage our culture and way of life by legitimizing a perverse union.

this does not even have any tautological value. it is just politically charged metaphysics.

[CosmicCowboy]

I've also read some interesting studies that (at least in males) are starting to relate male homosexual behavior to a specific section of the mothers X chromosome. It's interesting in that it somewhat explains how the genetic behavior continues to exist century after century. Logic would seem to indicate that under classic genetic reasoning that a non-reproducing trait would die out over time, but with the genetic dice roll of XX combinations the male homosexual genetic combination continues to be produced. The XX data hasn't been near as convincing for female homosexuals, however.

[Spurminator]

well, history is certainly on my side with this one.

Ever see the documentary Outraged? It talks about the phenomenon of anti-gay politicians being exposed to be gay themselves.

How about this recent list that I just discovered today?
http://nuffy.net/articles/top-10-anti-gay-activists-caught-being-gay.html

It makes sense, if you know anything about psychology. Why would someone be SO UPSET by what other people do in the privacy of their own homes, if they weren't projecting their own fear and self-hatred onto them? Most heterosexual people fall in two categories: Totally comfortable with glbt people, don't care, or not totally comfortable but can have a reasonable conversation about how that discomfort should not be translated into legal restrictions which limit another human being's civil rights. Many of the people in this second category are Christians, who understand that Christianity teaches love, tolerance, and acceptance of people who are different from you.

The third class of person, who actively rails about how "evil" or "wrong" homosexuality is, who campaigns to limit citizens' civil rights, that person clearly has some issues. And in many, many cases that "issue" turns out to be that said person is a big ole closet case.

This stuff really doesn't help anything. It's actually pretty ridiculous and does more damage to gay rights efforts than help.

I grew up around hundreds of devout Christians and I would guess 9 or more out of every ten of them oppose homosexual lifestyles and marriage, and would adamantly oppose it if they were brought into a discussion about it. They aren't all gay.

The more likely psychological driver is the fear of their children growing up in a culture that accepts homosexuality, which they fear will lead to their child choosing to be a homosexual.

[Supergirl]

This stuff really doesn't help anything. It's actually pretty ridiculous and does more damage to gay rights efforts than help.

I grew up around hundreds of devout Christians and I would guess 9 or more out of every ten of them oppose homosexual lifestyles and marriage, and would adamantly oppose it if they were brought into a discussion about it. They aren't all gay.

The more likely psychological driver is the fear of their children growing up in a culture that accepts homosexuality, which they fear will lead to their child choosing to be a homosexual.

I didn't say everyone who "opposes" homosexuality is gay. I said people who make a major production of it and devote significant chunks of their free time to campaigning to eliminate another class of citizens' civil rights - those people are likely covering SOMETHING up, avoiding some truth they don't want people to know.

And what does it mean to say someone "opposes" homosexuality? That's roughly the equivalent to opposing some other fact in the universe, like gravity, breathing oxygen, or being carbon-based life forms. Homosexuality is a fact, and always has been. It doesn't matter whether it's biologically determined or a "choice." It just IS. And as long as we have a democratic system of government which defends the rights of minorities as well as majorities, part of that system means protecting all citizens from discrimination. You can't have a right that is granted by our government (like marriage, or education, or health care by 2014) and deny access to that right to any minority group just because you don't like them or they make you uncomfortable.

[rjv]

I've also read some interesting studies that (at least in males) are starting to relate male homosexual behavior to a specific section of the mothers X chromosome. It's interesting in that it somewhat explains how the genetic behavior continues to exist century after century. Logic would seem to indicate that under classic genetic reasoning that a non-reproducing trait would die out over time, but with the genetic dice roll of XX combinations the male homosexual genetic combination continues to be produced. The XX data hasn't been near as convincing for female homosexuals, however.

being maladaptive to reproduction does not ensure that a genetic trait will disappear. even diseases caused by a recessive allele, such as sickle-cell anemia in its homozygous form, are not eliminated from the gene pool. (and homosexuality is not fatal plus homosexuals often reproduce.) deleterious traits that are also heterozygous are kept at low frequencies because if heterozygous, they are not expressed, and can be passed on perpetually, so they would only cause problems when matched with another heterozygous genotype such as a homozygous allele. also, natural levels of mutation offset the slow decrease in frequency through natural selection. so, as an example, if the frequency of such a disease is only one in ten thousand, to reduce such a harmful allele just tenfold would take 500 generations, or about twelve thousand years in a human population

[Spurminator]

I didn't say everyone who "opposes" homosexuality is gay. I said people who make a major production of it and devote significant chunks of their free time to campaigning to eliminate another class of citizens' civil rights - those people are likely covering SOMETHING up, avoiding some truth they don't want people to know.

Or it's just their chosen soapbox. There are people who make careers out of railing against Jews, Muslims, Christians, blacks, immigrants... White supremacists aren't covering up their own blackness, are they?

[George Gervin's Afro]

conservatives and logic like oil and water

[spursncowboys]

Is the judge gay?

[Blake]

Is the judge gay?

apparently he is

[Ginobilly]

Can't we agree that some states are never going to budge on gay marriage being legal or aren't going to budge for a while? The best bets for gay couples if they want to get married is to live on the West Coast, Northeast, and maybe the Midwest. I can see the argument against incest and bestiality because they're very gross and an animal can't give consent nor can a child. However, the argument against polygamy fails. If all adults are consenting and are of lega age, then what's the problem? Why can't a man have more than 1 wife or a woman have more than 1 husband? This could just be me but I think a negative thing about gays that is visible sometimes is their sense of entitlement and attention. And no, I'm not talking about gay marriage. I'm talking about how some gay people act like they deserve a medal or an award for being gay and/or deserve special privliges because of their gayness. It's like they think they are some kind of hero and inspirational figure to other gay people. It's weird and kind of annoying.

I taught animals gave consent when they start smelling your crotch?

[Supergirl]

Is the judge gay?

There's wild speculation made about this. He hasn't said he is. A SF newspaper made a claimed he was, but offered no evidence. What's more interesting is the context in which said offhand comment was made...


Vaughn Walker almost lost his chance to reach the federal bench because of claims that he was anti-gay and hostile to civil rights. Two dozen House Democrats, led by Rep. Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco, opposed his nomination because of his alleged "insensitivity" to gays and the poor. His first appointment, from President Ronald Reagan in 1987, stalled out in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

His nomination was renewed by President George H.W. Bush in early 1989.

Back then, Walker struggled to assure skeptical liberals that, as a judge, he could rule with impartiality even though he had represented the U.S. Olympic Committee in its successful effort to prevent an athletic competition in San Francisco from being called the Gay Olympic Games. He was harshly criticized for putting a lien on the home of a gay-games leader who was dying of AIDS. Walker insisted that he was not anti-gay and was only doing his best to serve his client.

Walker also was under fire for his membership in San Francisco's all-male Olympic Club. He resigned during the nomination process, which helped cement his confirmation.

Those who understood the distinct roles of lawyer-advocate and judge recognized that a person of ethics and fidelity to the law could separate his or her personal views and experiences from professional duty.

Today, at age 65, Judge Walker is presiding over the challenge to Proposition 8, which may well determine how quickly gays and lesbians achieve full marriage equality in this country. We now know what Walker never bothered to reveal when he was being castigated as anti-gay: He is gay, which changes neither his legal history nor his fitness for this assignment.

A judge's sexual orientation does not inherently shade his ability to read and interpret the U.S. Constitution with clear-eyed wisdom. Assuming this case advances on appeal, no matter how Walker rules, there almost certainly will be jurists who will need to set aside their religion's teachings - and, quite likely, the impact of their ruling on close friends or even a family member - as they do their utmost to uphold the meaning of the Constitution.

Walker did not think his private life was relevant to his ability to preside with fairness in the Prop. 8 trial. There is nothing in his long and laudable career to suggest otherwise.

http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-02-09/opinion/17872020_1_anti-gay-san-francisco-gay-olympic-games

[Ginobilly]

All this talk about incest and cousins has got me thinking. I have always wanted to bang and hook up with some of my female 2nd cousins who are hot as hell, but haven't been able to because of the laws and taboos of our American society.

[jack sommerset]

All this talk about incest and cousins has got me thinking. I have always wanted to bang and hook up with some of my female 2nd cousins who are hot as hell, but haven't been able to because of the laws and taboos of our American society.

That blows dude.

I think the ban on queers getting hitched has been lifted. They can start the ceremonies on August 18th.

[CosmicCowboy]

All this talk about incest and cousins has got me thinking. I have always wanted to bang and hook up with some of my female 2nd cousins who are hot as hell, but haven't been able to because of the laws and taboos of our American society.

2nd Cousins are legal. I popped one in high school.

[MiamiHeat]

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa136/Msalgado80/Obama%2008/porchhatecake.jpg

Porch Hate Cake

Tasty and unorganized.

Not MiamiHeat Approved

Wanted to bump this thread because while reading Gifford's shooting thread, I came upon this :


I don't remember saying that they don't have the right to say these things, WH. However, I do remember pointing out several times that free speech and positions of authority come with responsibilities.

I made it a point to make it very clear that I didn't want legislation because I knew someone would bust out the free speech argument.

You can be dismissive of her comments. Thats completely your prerogative.

However, to say she was merely pointing out a possible outcome with no intent is naive as all hell. Her intent was obviously to sway - as a warning to what might happen if the ruling doesn't go the way they'd like.

To those who believe as she does, this can serve as a legitimacy to act out against a judiciary they see as corrupt and out of control. By acknowledging this even as a plausible action she gives it so much legitimacy that its not even funny.

And that right there underscores the point of how irresponsible it is. Even if she has no intent to use it as anything other that a weak scare tactic to try and strong arm a judge thats not how everyone supporting their cause may view it. Its a perfect example of irresponsible rhetoric that gives legs to those who already hold anti government sentiments and those she represents.

:lmao:lmao

Seems like MannyIsGod owes me an apology for his posts in this thread, since he now agrees with me.

Looking back now, I was throwing my pearls before swine in this thread.

Good job on finally realizing your mistake though, MIG.

[MiamiHeat]

Now you are going down the wrong path.

I clearly said I don't want people inciting violence among the population. That could happen in 2010.


Happened in 2011.

Downright prophetic, isn't it?

[ChumpDumper]

lol reading comprehension