Religions > Atheism > Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote.
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Randy Jabsco" |
| Date: |
12 Dec 2003 03:02:24 PM |
| Object: |
Another anti-gay marriage bill passes by over 75% of the vote. |
Hey, I thought you faggots said that people were "accepting" you now.
What's this all about? I thought you faggots said that "ignorance to old
beliefs are making way". Come on faggots, explain this... I don't
understand. If people love faggots so much, why would over two-thirds vote
otherwise? Why is there currently 38 states with anti-gay marriage laws,
all properly voted for by the public? I am having troubles understanding
why the only way faggots can appear to be accepted is by finding a
sympathetic judge to scratch out laws for them. Can't you get the
"accepting" public to vote for them for you? Why isn't it that the faggots
aren't putting these issues on the ballets rather than taking it to
sympathetic judges and congress men?
===
Ohio House passes anti-gay marriage bill
COLUMBUS -- Gay marriage would be banned and state employees could not
obtain health insurance and other benefits for unmarried partners under a
bill passed by the Ohio House on Wednesday.
The measure, approved by a 73-23 vote, would recognize marriage as a union
"between one man and one woman" and declare that extending benefits for
unmarried partners to state employees, whether of the same or opposite sex,
is against state policy.
Supporters of the measure point toward the possibility of other states
approving homosexual unions as the impetus for Ohio to set its own standards
for marriage.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court last month declared that state's
gay marriage ban unconstitutional and ordered lawmakers to extend the legal
benefits of marriage to domestic partners.
But opponents called the bill discrimination.
House minority leader Rep. Chris Redfern, D-Catawba Island, said committee
hearings on the bill were filled with "hate filled language and bigoted
comments" about homosexuals.
"I cannot allow myself to be aligned with that," he said. "I have respect
for my fellow members ... but I don't want them to be the morality police."
Redfern added that considering society's 50-percent divorce rate, it's hard
to argue that the issue is about upholding the sanctity of marriage.
.
|
|
| User: "Dennis Kemmerer" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 04:34:49 PM |
|
|
"Vic Sagerquist" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:94539611Cblastfemur@127.0.0.1...
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Bob:
L D Blake wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 10:06:16 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote:
You have chosen not to accept the responsibilities of family and child
raising that marriage means and supports.
Any idea how many gay people have children?
GEES!
Laura
None. Go back to mommy and ask about the birds and the bees. ;-)
Idiot.
My old high school girlfriend, now lesbian, has three children from two
separate failed marriages. She now lives with her children and a
"partner", whom she calls "wife". They held a private ceremony on the
beach, said their vows to one another, and are married - not legally, of
course, and without the tax benefits, etc.
How does her situation threaten yours?
Lesbians? They make Booby's weewee hard.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Vic blows his rump rider buddies and calls it "marriage." |
16 Dec 2003 06:06:32 PM |
|
|
Vic Sagerquist wrote:
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Bob:
L D Blake wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 10:06:16 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote:
You have chosen not to accept the responsibilities of family and child
raising that marriage means and supports.
Any idea how many gay people have children?
GEES!
Laura
None. Go back to mommy and ask about the birds and the bees. ;-)
Idiot.
My old high school girlfriend, now lesbian, has three children from two
separate failed marriages. She now lives with her children and a
"partner", whom she calls "wife".
Shame on them. A growing mountain of evidence shows that children
growing up without their father do worse in every measurable way.
Hurting children by breaking up families and depriving children of their
father is one of the reasons why decent people are becoming more and
more supportive of marriages and learning how badly the current legal
climate really is. Women who abuse children for their own sordid sexual
jollies ought to be caught and punished.
They held a private ceremony on the
beach, said their vows to one another, and are married - not legally, of
course, and without the tax benefits, etc.
How does her situation threaten yours?
Every child who grows up emotionally injured hurts the whole society and
everyone in it. Children raised under those conditions are more likely
to end up in prison, more likely to kill someone, more likely to be drug
addicts, or bear children young and live on welfare. They are less
likely to succeed in school and relationships. Deliberately raising a
child in those conditions is child abuse.
You are incapable of coherent thought, Bob. Your homophobia will not allow
you to consider all the possibilities.
You are a child abusing bigot, and your friends are too. Perverted
sexual lust is not an excuse for hurting children.
You've painted a little room with
all the scenes you'd like to see; there you live and think they are
reality. Do yourself a favor, get out and see the real world.
LOL. Your psychotic view of the world is not a criteria.
Bob
.
|
|
|
| User: "curtsybear" |
|
| Title: Re: Vic blows his rump rider buddies and calls it "marriage." |
17 Dec 2003 02:25:26 PM |
|
|
In alt.politics.homosexuality Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote:
Shame on them. A growing mountain of evidence shows that children
growing up without their father do worse in every measurable way.
Even worse than you?!?!? Horrors!
--
Curtis at Sieber dot Com
"I got spasms cause I whopped forty fags in the bushes on Wednesday.
Some came back twice. When one of them shot his wad after being walloped,
I threw in the towel. I REFUSE to aid them in their wickedness."
-- Thurgood at least helps them to clean up with that towel, though.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: Bob trumpets is Caveman Ignorance for all the world to see |
17 Dec 2003 11:03:18 AM |
|
|
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Bob:
Vic Sagerquist wrote:
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Bob:
L D Blake wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 10:06:16 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com>
wrote:
You have chosen not to accept the responsibilities of family and
child raising that marriage means and supports.
Any idea how many gay people have children?
GEES!
Laura
None. Go back to mommy and ask about the birds and the bees. ;-)
Idiot.
My old high school girlfriend, now lesbian, has three children from
two separate failed marriages. She now lives with her children and a
"partner", whom she calls "wife".
Shame on them. A growing mountain of evidence shows that children
growing up without their father do worse in every measurable way.
Hurting children by breaking up families and depriving children of their
father is one of the reasons why decent people are becoming more and
more supportive of marriages and learning how badly the current legal
climate really is. Women who abuse children for their own sordid sexual
jollies ought to be caught and punished.
My judgement stands. You are an idiot. You are also a prejudiced bigot -
but you've already proven that. My friend was the victim of two husbands
who physically abused her. Staying married to either of them would have
hurt the children physically as well as psychologically. Assuming she
lived that long.
They held a private ceremony on the
beach, said their vows to one another, and are married - not legally,
of course, and without the tax benefits, etc.
How does her situation threaten yours?
Every child who grows up emotionally injured hurts the whole society and
everyone in it. Children raised under those conditions are more likely
to end up in prison, more likely to kill someone, more likely to be drug
addicts, or bear children young and live on welfare. They are less
likely to succeed in school and relationships. Deliberately raising a
child in those conditions is child abuse.
Please explain how an alternative marriage, one that provides a warm,
loving home to three children is not better than one where an abusive
father threatens them, physically hurts them on a daily basis?
Bob, you're a waste of time.
<irrelevant ad-hom ***** snipped>
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
______________
The fool says in his heart "there is no God".
The wise man says it to the world.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dennis Kemmerer" |
|
| Title: Re: Bob trumpets is Caveman Ignorance for all the world to see |
17 Dec 2003 01:06:24 PM |
|
|
"Vic Sagerquist" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:945456F85blastfemur@127.0.0.1...
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Bob:
[snip]
Bob, you're a waste of time.
You're just figuring that out? :)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lawrence Seib" |
|
| Title: Re: Bob trumpets is Caveman Ignorance for all the world to see |
17 Dec 2003 04:39:05 PM |
|
|
(Vic Sagerquist) wrote in message news:<945456F85blastfemur@127.0.0.1>...
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Bob:
Vic Sagerquist wrote:
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Bob:
They held a private ceremony on the
beach, said their vows to one another, and are married - not legally,
of course, and without the tax benefits, etc.
How does her situation threaten yours?
Every child who grows up emotionally injured hurts the whole society and
everyone in it. Children raised under those conditions are more likely
to end up in prison, more likely to kill someone, more likely to be drug
addicts, or bear children young and live on welfare. They are less
likely to succeed in school and relationships. Deliberately raising a
child in those conditions is child abuse.
by that reasoning, since most people in prisons are
theists, then we should ban all religion.
Larry
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wild Bill Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 01:45:43 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:54:19 -0500, L D Blake
<ldblake@JUNKBLOCK.sympatico.ca> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 10:06:16 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote:
You have chosen not to accept the responsibilities of family and child
raising that marriage means and supports.
Any idea how many gay people have children?
Just about the same number that lie about their sexual orientation.
People are well aware that homos lie like rugs...You need not emphasis
it.
GEES!
-----
Laura
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff North" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
17 Dec 2003 05:26:35 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 10:06:16 -0700, in alt.politics.homosexuality Bob
<boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Adam Marczyk wrote:
| > Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| >>>
| >>>What they are now demanding is the very same right everybody else has.
| >>>It is a legal, secular right that is being discussed nothing more than
| >>>that.
| >>
| >>Wrong. Gays already have the same rights everybody else has.
| >
| > Except the right to marry, and the legal benefits that come along with it.
|
| LIE. You want to turn marriage into some kind of government giveaway
| program and use it to get special benefits from the government.
The government saw fit to allow you to marry.
| You have chosen not to accept the responsibilities of family and child
| raising that marriage means and supports. You greedy ***** lovers
| want government benefits without the huge costs and responsibilities of
| straight people.
So that's what this is all about. Your are just plain jealous any
marriage that doesn't produce rugrats. Obviously you hate your life
and family.
| Go pound sand.
Nope, I have a boyfriend for that :-P
---------------------------------------------------------------
jnorth@yourpantsbigpond.net.au : Remove your pants to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 02:49:08 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 08:13:25 -0700, Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote:
tonyofbexarremovethis@yahoo.dk wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:23:26 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:23:21 GMT, "Adam Marczyk"
<ebonmuse@deletethis.hotmail.com> wrote:
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FDCCDA6.3020000@hotmail.com...
The other Donald wrote:
snip
After Canada legalized ( but has not yet finalized) same-sex
marriage, there was no rush down the aisle to the altar. Out of
34,200 self-identified homosexual couples, only 1.4 percent obtained
marriage licenses. The editor of Fab, a popular gay magazine in
Toronto, explained, ''I'd be for marriage if I thought gay people
would challenge and change the institution and NOT BUY INTO the
traditional meaning of 'till death do us part' and MONOGAMY FOREVER.''
Gays already have the liberty to live their lives as they
choose, set up housekeeping, share income and expenses, make contracts
and wills, and transfer property. What they are now demanding is
respect and social standing for a lifestyle that a majority of others
believe is immoral (like mixed-gender cohabiting).
What they are now demanding is the very same right everybody else has.
It is a legal, secular right that is being discussed nothing more than
that.
Wrong. Gays already have the same rights everybody else has. What they
are demanding is to destroy traditional cultural institutions and crate
special "rights" to government and commercial benefits without having to
earn them.
Blow your smoke all you like. It may fool some gullible fools.
But you are the exception, right?
That amounts to the minority forcing its views on the majority.
Nobody is entitled to respect for behavior of which we don't approve.
And the law would not require you to respect anyone, so there is no
problem.
Yes, no law will create respect for rump riding, so you might as well
give it up.
Give what up? You are not even trying to make sense are you?
Legalizing same-sex marriage would not merely permit a small
number of people to choose alternate lifestyles (they are already
doing that).
And the law has absolutely nothing to do with that.
The gay demanded laws would require governments and companies to give
gays unearned benefits. It's greed and lust made law.
Gosh, do you mean to say that married heterosexuals are being paid
unearned benefits? Are those special rights?
It would force the rest of us to accept a public
judgment that "personal desire outweighs the value of traditional
marriage and outweighs the need of children for mothers and fathers."
Perhaps you would like to explain how it does any of those things?
What part of any proposed law would call for those things. How would
two males, for example, getting married do anything negative to the
needs of children? Instead of vague charges I would like to see
specific examples in the real world.
That's the classic rhetorical question that gets answered a thousand
times but rump riders keep repeating "answer the question" when they
don't like the answer.
There is nothing rhetorical about it. Charges were made. I am asking
for facts to back up the charges. Apparently you are unable to
provide them, so you babble more insults. Don't you have anything to
offer except your insults? They are not even very good insults. You
just repeat the same inanites in every post. Don't you ever get bored
acting like an obnoxious fool?
Thomas P.
None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has got nothing on," said a little child.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 09:44:14 AM |
|
|
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Bob:
tonyofbexarremovethis@yahoo.dk wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:23:26 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
What they are now demanding is the very same right everybody else has.
It is a legal, secular right that is being discussed nothing more than
that.
Wrong. Gays already have the same rights everybody else has. What they
are demanding is to destroy traditional cultural institutions and crate
special "rights" to government and commercial benefits without having to
earn them.
Did you earn yours? And how?
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
______________
The fool says in his heart "there is no God".
The wise man says it to the world.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ward Stewart" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 06:17:25 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 09:44:14 -0600, (Vic
Sagerquist) wrote:
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Bob:
tonyofbexarremovethis@yahoo.dk wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:23:26 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
What they are now demanding is the very same right everybody else has.
It is a legal, secular right that is being discussed nothing more than
that.
Wrong. Gays already have the same rights everybody else has.
Surely you cannot believe this silliness! We cannot marry and cannot
get from OUR government the next of kin status which is an essential
part of equality.
What they
are demanding is to destroy traditional cultural institutions and crate
special "rights" to government and commercial benefits without having to
earn them.
Did you earn yours? And how?
A fair question, George and I have paid in on about a CENTURY of
taxes, school, state, sales, income and social security. Further, I,
when called, went into the army during the Korean war. My career as a
nurse brought me to the Bowery in NYC where I scraped the ***** off of
the pitiful folks there and gave careful loving nursing care. During
the last ten years of my time as a nurse I volunteered a full day a
week to work in the Community Health Center in Greenwich village where
our patients were the first to fall into the terrible pit of AIDs.
We HAVE earned a status as worthy as Liza Minelli or the Gabor whores.
ward
...
--------------------------
Ward and George
48 years together
and yet
Strangers before the law.
--------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wild Bill Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 08:19:59 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 00:17:25 GMT, Ward Stewart
<wstewart@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
I volunteered a full day a week to work in the Community Health
Center in Greenwich village where our patients were the first to
fall into the terrible pit of AIDs.
No, you patients where scummy homosexuals who had fallen into some
other scummy homosexual's ***** HOLE and contracted AIDS!
We HAVE earned a status as worthy as Liza Minelli or the Gabor whores.
THAT IS INDEED A FACT! You do deserve about the same level of respect
as do three Hollywood whores.
BTW - wart, what does your new "dicked canadian bride" think of your
cruising the public men's rest rooms on Waikiki Beach every Saturday
night? Doesn't it ***** HIM of just a little bit?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
17 Dec 2003 10:49:42 AM |
|
|
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Wild Bill Taylor:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 00:17:25 GMT, Ward Stewart
<wstewart@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
I volunteered a full day a week to work in the Community Health
Center in Greenwich village where our patients were the first to
fall into the terrible pit of AIDs.
No, you patients where scummy homosexuals who had fallen into some
other scummy homosexual's ***** HOLE and contracted AIDS!
Your ignorance is surpassed only by your bigotry. Translating that meager
excuse for a sentence, I can see you don't have a clue how AIDS is spread.
If you got into a manly fist fight with one of your drunk beer buddies down
at the Fillin' Station, and the burly bouncer tried to break it up,
creating a melting pot for the blood of all three of you, you yourself
could contract AIDS - assuming either your buddy or the bouncer neither of
you know is a carrier of the HIV Virus. Magic Johnson has HIV. Is he a
fudge packer?
<snip>
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
______________
The fool says in his heart "there is no God".
The wise man says it to the world.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wild Bill Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
17 Dec 2003 11:55:06 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 10:49:42 -0600, (Vic
Sagerquist) wrote:
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Wild Bill Taylor:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 00:17:25 GMT, Ward Stewart
<wstewart@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
I volunteered a full day a week to work in the Community Health
Center in Greenwich village where our patients were the first to
fall into the terrible pit of AIDs.
No, you patients where scummy homosexuals who had fallen into some
other scummy homosexual's ***** HOLE and contracted AIDS!
Your ignorance is surpassed only by your bigotry. Translating that meager
excuse for a sentence, I can see you don't have a clue how AIDS is spread.
If you got into a manly fist fight with one of your drunk beer buddies down
at the Fillin' Station, and the burly bouncer tried to break it up,
creating a melting pot for the blood of all three of you, you yourself
could contract AIDS - assuming either your buddy or the bouncer neither of
you know is a carrier of the HIV Virus. Magic Johnson has HIV. Is he a
fudge packer?
Almost 50 percent of all new AIDS cases in the US every year are
counted among homosexuals. Not just last year or the year before but
EVERY YEAR for 20+ years running it has been the very same way. Almost
50% of the AIDS cases occurring in the US EVERY YEAR among a group of
men who represent LESS than 3% of the total population.
Who is that doesn't know the number one vector of AIDS in the US?
I know it is and always has been homosexuals, you apparently don't
(or could you simply be lying...)
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "L D Blake" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
17 Dec 2003 01:37:52 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 17:55:06 GMT, Wild Bill Taylor wrote:
Almost 50 percent of all new AIDS cases in the US every year are
counted among homosexuals.
Actually the highest risk group right now is teenage girls.
-----
Laura
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wild Bill Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
17 Dec 2003 10:05:55 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:37:52 -0500, L D Blake
<ldblake[JUNKBLOCK]@sympatico.ca> wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 17:55:06 GMT, Wild Bill Taylor wrote:
Almost 50 percent of all new AIDS cases in the US every year are
counted among homosexuals.
Actually the highest risk group right now is teenage girls.
No, you are totally wrong. I suggest you do a search on CDC/GAY/AIDS
And find out what the ***** is going on before you spew such bull *****!
-----
Laura
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
17 Dec 2003 12:12:43 PM |
|
|
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Wild Bill Taylor:
No, you patients where scummy homosexuals who had fallen into some
other scummy homosexual's ***** HOLE and contracted AIDS!
Your ignorance is surpassed only by your bigotry. Translating that
meager excuse for a sentence, I can see you don't have a clue how AIDS
is spread. If you got into a manly fist fight with one of your drunk
beer buddies down at the Fillin' Station, and the burly bouncer tried
to break it up, creating a melting pot for the blood of all three of
you, you yourself could contract AIDS - assuming either your buddy or
the bouncer neither of you know is a carrier of the HIV Virus. Magic
Johnson has HIV. Is he a fudge packer?
Almost 50 percent of all new AIDS cases in the US every year are
counted among homosexuals. Not just last year or the year before but
EVERY YEAR for 20+ years running it has been the very same way. Almost
50% of the AIDS cases occurring in the US EVERY YEAR among a group of
men who represent LESS than 3% of the total population.
Who is that doesn't know the number one vector of AIDS in the US?
I know it is and always has been homosexuals, you apparently don't
(or could you simply be lying...)
Which, of course, leaves the other 50% as possible reasons for aids.
Hardly a point-spread with which to base your assumptions and hatred.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
______________
The fool says in his heart "there is no God".
The wise man says it to the world.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wild Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
17 Dec 2003 10:02:33 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 12:12:43 -0600, (Vic
Sagerquist) wrote:
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Wild Bill Taylor:
No, you patients where scummy homosexuals who had fallen into some
other scummy homosexual's ***** HOLE and contracted AIDS!
Your ignorance is surpassed only by your bigotry. Translating that
meager excuse for a sentence, I can see you don't have a clue how AIDS
is spread. If you got into a manly fist fight with one of your drunk
beer buddies down at the Fillin' Station, and the burly bouncer tried
to break it up, creating a melting pot for the blood of all three of
you, you yourself could contract AIDS - assuming either your buddy or
the bouncer neither of you know is a carrier of the HIV Virus. Magic
Johnson has HIV. Is he a fudge packer?
Almost 50 percent of all new AIDS cases in the US every year are
counted among homosexuals. Not just last year or the year before but
EVERY YEAR for 20+ years running it has been the very same way. Almost
50% of the AIDS cases occurring in the US EVERY YEAR among a group of
men who represent LESS than 3% of the total population.
Who is that doesn't know the number one vector of AIDS in the US?
I know it is and always has been homosexuals, you apparently don't
(or could you simply be lying...)
Which, of course, leaves the other 50% as possible reasons for aids.
Hardly a point-spread with which to base your assumptions and hatred.
You are far to stupid for me to waste my time on. Perhaps one the
queers will explain ratio and per capita to you, ***** WIT!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ward Stewart" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 05:53:16 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:03:22 +0100,
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:23:26 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:23:21 GMT, "Adam Marczyk"
<ebonmuse@deletethis.hotmail.com> wrote:
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FDCCDA6.3020000@hotmail.com...
The other Donald wrote:
snip
After Canada legalized ( but has not yet finalized) same-sex
marriage, there was no rush down the aisle to the altar. Out of
34,200 self-identified homosexual couples, only 1.4 percent obtained
marriage licenses. The editor of Fab, a popular gay magazine in
Toronto, explained, ''I'd be for marriage if I thought gay people
would challenge and change the institution and NOT BUY INTO the
traditional meaning of 'till death do us part' and MONOGAMY FOREVER.''
Gays already have the liberty to live their lives as they
choose, set up housekeeping, share income and expenses, make contracts
and wills, and transfer property. What they are now demanding is
respect and social standing for a lifestyle that a majority of others
believe is immoral (like mixed-gender cohabiting).
What they are now demanding is the very same right everybody else has.
It is a legal, secular right that is being discussed nothing more than
that.
That amounts to the minority forcing its views on the majority.
Nobody is entitled to respect for behavior of which we don't approve.
And the law would not require you to respect anyone, so there is no
problem.
Legalizing same-sex marriage would not merely permit a small
number of people to choose alternate lifestyles (they are already
doing that).
And the law has absolutely nothing to do with that.
It would force the rest of us to accept a public
judgment that "personal desire outweighs the value of traditional
marriage and outweighs the need of children for mothers and fathers."
Perhaps you would like to explain how it does any of those things?
What part of any proposed law would call for those things. How would
two males, for example, getting married do anything negative to the
needs of children? Instead of vague charges I would like to see
specific examples in the real world.
By these sad vacant folks, persistent reiteration IS a "specific
example."
The emptier the can, the louder is the rattle of the pebble therein.
ward
----------------------------------------------------
It is ironic that in the early part of the nineteenth
century my New England family was engaged in the theft
of property and the smuggling of this property into
Canada. When the property was delivered it was
discovered that the property was human beings, Canada
recognized this humanity and set them free.
Now, a century and a half later, George and I are forced
to travel to Canada where we too are recognized as
full human beings and permitted to marry. It is a
sadness that the country we love, the country of our
birth refuses to recognize that we are human beings
and citizens and entitled to the human rights and civil
rights supposedly our birthright. That despite our
calling ourselves "The Land of the Free" and despite
the many promises in the founding documents offering
EQUALITY for ALL.
ward
----------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wild Bill Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 06:01:10 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 23:53:16 GMT, Ward Stewart
<wstewart@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
The emptier the can, the louder is the rattle of the pebble therein.
An analogy to your Richard Cranium of course.
BTW - wart, what does your new "dicked canadian bride" think of your
cruising the public men's rest rooms on Waikiki Beach every Saturday
night? Doesn't it ***** HIM of just a little bit?
ward
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Ongapo" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 01:19:28 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:03:22 +0100,
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:23:26 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:23:21 GMT, "Adam Marczyk"
<ebonmuse@deletethis.hotmail.com> wrote:
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FDCCDA6.3020000@hotmail.com...
The other Donald wrote:
snip
After Canada legalized ( but has not yet finalized) same-sex
marriage, there was no rush down the aisle to the altar. Out of
34,200 self-identified homosexual couples, only 1.4 percent obtained
marriage licenses. The editor of Fab, a popular gay magazine in
Toronto, explained, ''I'd be for marriage if I thought gay people
would challenge and change the institution and NOT BUY INTO the
traditional meaning of 'till death do us part' and MONOGAMY FOREVER.''
Gays already have the liberty to live their lives as they
choose, set up housekeeping, share income and expenses, make contracts
and wills, and transfer property. What they are now demanding is
respect and social standing for a lifestyle that a majority of others
believe is immoral (like mixed-gender cohabiting).
What they are now demanding is the very same right everybody else has.
It is a legal, secular right that is being discussed nothing more than
that.
Every persons in the US have exactly the same rights with regards to
marriage as does every other person. Only an uninformed idiot or one
with a perverted sexual behavior, Pedophiles, Homosexuals etc., would
deny that FACT.
That amounts to the minority forcing its views on the majority.
Nobody is entitled to respect for behavior of which we don't approve.
And the law would not require you to respect anyone, so there is no
problem.
You demand tolerance -- I won't give it to you because the state says
I don't have to because your "demands" are unreasonable and there is
no compelling reason why I should afford you tolerance. See how that
comes down?
Legalizing same-sex marriage would not merely permit a small
number of people to choose alternate lifestyles (they are already
doing that).
And the law has absolutely nothing to do with that.
You are foolish.
It would force the rest of us to accept a public
judgment that "personal desire outweighs the value of traditional
marriage and outweighs the need of children for mothers and fathers."
Perhaps you would like to explain how it does any of those things?
What part of any proposed law would call for those things. How would
two males, for example, getting married do anything negative to the
needs of children? Instead of vague charges I would like to see
specific examples in the real world.
Work it out for yourself. The VAST MAJORITY of societies (world wide)
clearly understand it and for that reason oppose SSM.
snip
Thomas P.
None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has got nothing on," said a little child.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 02:49:10 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:19:28 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:03:22 +0100,
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:23:26 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:23:21 GMT, "Adam Marczyk"
<ebonmuse@deletethis.hotmail.com> wrote:
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FDCCDA6.3020000@hotmail.com...
The other Donald wrote:
snip
After Canada legalized ( but has not yet finalized) same-sex
marriage, there was no rush down the aisle to the altar. Out of
34,200 self-identified homosexual couples, only 1.4 percent obtained
marriage licenses. The editor of Fab, a popular gay magazine in
Toronto, explained, ''I'd be for marriage if I thought gay people
would challenge and change the institution and NOT BUY INTO the
traditional meaning of 'till death do us part' and MONOGAMY FOREVER.''
Gays already have the liberty to live their lives as they
choose, set up housekeeping, share income and expenses, make contracts
and wills, and transfer property. What they are now demanding is
respect and social standing for a lifestyle that a majority of others
believe is immoral (like mixed-gender cohabiting).
What they are now demanding is the very same right everybody else has.
It is a legal, secular right that is being discussed nothing more than
that.
Every persons in the US have exactly the same rights with regards to
marriage as does every other person.
Any unmarried, adult male has the right to marry any unmarried, adult
female who will have him. An adult, unmarried homosexual may not
marry the adult of his choice. The rights are not equal. They are
unequal in exactly the same way as the miscegenation laws were, and
you are using the same defense as was used by those defending those
laws. The Supreme Court rejected that defense.
Only an uninformed idiot or one
with a perverted sexual behavior, Pedophiles, Homosexuals etc., would
deny that FACT.
I saw assertions. What fact are you talking about?
That amounts to the minority forcing its views on the majority.
Nobody is entitled to respect for behavior of which we don't approve.
And the law would not require you to respect anyone, so there is no
problem.
You demand tolerance -- I won't give it to you because the state says
I don't have to because your "demands" are unreasonable and there is
no compelling reason why I should afford you tolerance. See how that
comes down?
Legal rights are being demanded nothing extra. You will be free to
continue to be as intolerant as you like. By the way, nobody really
cares what you will give or not give. The law will be changed anyway.
Legalizing same-sex marriage would not merely permit a small
number of people to choose alternate lifestyles (they are already
doing that).
And the law has absolutely nothing to do with that.
You are foolish.
Do you actually have some facts to introduce, or do you intend to
continue to use insults instead?
It would force the rest of us to accept a public
judgment that "personal desire outweighs the value of traditional
marriage and outweighs the need of children for mothers and fathers."
Perhaps you would like to explain how it does any of those things?
What part of any proposed law would call for those things. How would
two males, for example, getting married do anything negative to the
needs of children? Instead of vague charges I would like to see
specific examples in the real world.
Work it out for yourself. The VAST MAJORITY of societies (world wide)
clearly understand it and for that reason oppose SSM.
They are your assertions. Do you or do you not have any objective
data to offer in support of your assertions? If it is so obvious, you
should have no problem supporting them.
Thomas P.
None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has got nothing on," said a little child.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Thomas blows the goat. |
16 Dec 2003 02:57:27 PM |
|
|
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:19:28 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
Any unmarried, adult male has the right to marry any unmarried, adult
female who will have him.
You got it Thomas. Now go in peace and have a nice life.
An adult, unmarried homosexual may not
marry the adult of his choice.
See above. Rump riders have the same rights as anyone else. No go in
peace and have a nice life.
Bob
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brent Norman" |
|
| Title: Re: Thomas blows the goat. |
16 Dec 2003 11:08:40 PM |
|
|
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3FDF71B7.7010601@hotmail.com>...
tonyofbexarremovethis@yahoo.dk wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:19:28 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
Any unmarried, adult male has the right to marry any unmarried, adult
female who will have him.
You got it Thomas. Now go in peace and have a nice life.
An adult, unmarried homosexual may not
marry the adult of his choice.
See above. Rump riders have the same rights as anyone else. No go in
peace and have a nice life.
Bob
Here's a purely hypothetical:
For a moment, imagine that homosexuality is the norm for everyone, and
heterosexuality is the minority behaviour. Marriage is denied to
heterosexuals because it is said that "heterosexuals have the same
rights as everyone else.. a heterosexual female has the right to get
married...to another female!".
"Rump Riders"?...please... The language in here is reminiscent of a
4th grade playground.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dennis Kemmerer" |
|
| Title: Re: Thomas blows the goat. |
17 Dec 2003 01:51:26 PM |
|
|
"Brent Norman" <nelliganemile@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a7ad4b4f.0312162108.2640caa0@posting.google.com...
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<3FDF71B7.7010601@hotmail.com>...
tonyofbexarremovethis@yahoo.dk wrote:
[snip]
"Rump Riders"?...please... The language in here is reminiscent of a
4th grade playground.
Precisely Boob's level.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Thomas blows the goat. |
17 Dec 2003 10:53:28 AM |
|
|
Brent Norman wrote:
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3FDF71B7.7010601@hotmail.com>...
tonyofbexarremovethis@yahoo.dk wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:19:28 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
Any unmarried, adult male has the right to marry any unmarried, adult
female who will have him.
You got it Thomas. Now go in peace and have a nice life.
An adult, unmarried homosexual may not
marry the adult of his choice.
See above. Rump riders have the same rights as anyone else. No go in
peace and have a nice life.
Bob
Here's a purely hypothetical:
For a moment, imagine that homosexuality is the norm for everyone, and
heterosexuality is the minority behaviour.
If people reproduced like the Shakers, there would be the same number of
people left as Shakers.
Marriage is denied to
heterosexuals because it is said that "heterosexuals have the same
rights as everyone else.. a heterosexual female has the right to get
married...to another female!".
"Rump Riders"?...please... The language in here is reminiscent of a
4th grade playground.
Sane people don't want the society to end up like the Shakers.
Bob
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brent Norman" |
|
| Title: Re: Thomas blows the goat. |
17 Dec 2003 05:51:45 PM |
|
|
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3FE08A08.2080008@hotmail.com>...
Brent Norman wrote:
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3FDF71B7.7010601@hotmail.com>...
tonyofbexarremovethis@yahoo.dk wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:19:28 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
Any unmarried, adult male has the right to marry any unmarried, adult
female who will have him.
You got it Thomas. Now go in peace and have a nice life.
An adult, unmarried homosexual may not
marry the adult of his choice.
See above. Rump riders have the same rights as anyone else. No go in
peace and have a nice life.
Bob
Here's a purely hypothetical:
For a moment, imagine that homosexuality is the norm for everyone, and
heterosexuality is the minority behaviour.
If people reproduced like the Shakers, there would be the same number of
people left as Shakers.
The Shakers, if I recall, were extremely devoted to their religious
worship. The males and females worked separately, valuing things like
common property, celibacy, confession of sins, equality of men and
women, pacificism and separation from the world. Today there is only
one Shaker community in existence in Maine, so you are correct.
The scenario I illustrated was purely hypothetical. There will never
be a society where everyone is homosexual. And I am certainly not
endorsing such an idea, which would be wildly ridiculous.
Marriage is denied to
heterosexuals because it is said that "heterosexuals have the same
rights as everyone else.. a heterosexual female has the right to get
married...to another female!".
"Rump Riders"?...please... The language in here is reminiscent of a
4th grade playground.
Sane people don't want the society to end up like the Shakers.
Bob
The Shakers started to grow as more people were drawn to it by its
simple values, which were not swayed by their great economic
successes.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Ongapo" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 04:11:34 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:49:10 +0100,
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:19:28 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:03:22 +0100,
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:23:26 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:23:21 GMT, "Adam Marczyk"
<ebonmuse@deletethis.hotmail.com> wrote:
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FDCCDA6.3020000@hotmail.com...
The other Donald wrote:
snip
After Canada legalized ( but has not yet finalized) same-sex
marriage, there was no rush down the aisle to the altar. Out of
34,200 self-identified homosexual couples, only 1.4 percent obtained
marriage licenses. The editor of Fab, a popular gay magazine in
Toronto, explained, ''I'd be for marriage if I thought gay people
would challenge and change the institution and NOT BUY INTO the
traditional meaning of 'till death do us part' and MONOGAMY FOREVER.''
Gays already have the liberty to live their lives as they
choose, set up housekeeping, share income and expenses, make contracts
and wills, and transfer property. What they are now demanding is
respect and social standing for a lifestyle that a majority of others
believe is immoral (like mixed-gender cohabiting).
What they are now demanding is the very same right everybody else has.
It is a legal, secular right that is being discussed nothing more than
that.
Every persons in the US have exactly the same rights with regards to
marriage as does every other person.
Any unmarried, adult male has the right to marry any unmarried, adult
female who will have him. An adult, unmarried homosexual may not
marry the adult of his choice.
Neither may an adult lesbian marry a 13 year girl . But if you homos
ever get your way they will
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
16 Dec 2003 10:38:24 PM |
|
|
Lo, many moons past, on Tue, 16 Dec 2003 22:11:34 GMT, a stranger
called by some Al Ongapo came forth and told this tale in alt.atheism
Neither may an adult lesbian marry a 13 year girl . But if you homos
ever get your way they will
Of coursem you are too much of an ***** to understand "infiomed
consent."
And most pedophiles are straight. Or Catholic.
--
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Ezekiel 13:20 "Wherefore thus saith the
Lord GOD; Behold, I am against your pillows"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Gays get anoth -Bob gets a "***** SLAP" with his own stupidity |
17 Dec 2003 12:39:34 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 22:11:34 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:49:10 +0100,
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 19:19:28 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:03:22 +0100,
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:23:26 GMT, Al Ongapo wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:23:21 GMT, "Adam Marczyk"
<ebonmuse@deletethis.hotmail.com> wrote:
Bob <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3FDCCDA6.3020000@hotmail.com...
The other Donald wrote:
snip
After Canada legalized ( but has not yet finalized) same-sex
marriage, there was no rush down the aisle to the altar. Out of
34,200 self-identified homosexual couples, only 1.4 percent obtained
marriage licenses. The editor of Fab, a popular gay magazine in
Toronto, explained, ''I'd be for marriage if I thought gay people
would challenge and change the institution and NOT BUY INTO the
traditional meaning of 'till death do us part' and MONOGAMY FOREVER.''
Gays already have the liberty to live their lives as they
choose, set up housekeeping, share income and expenses, make contracts
and wills, and transfer property. What they are now demanding is
respect and social standing for a lifestyle that a majority of others
believe is immoral (like mixed-gender cohabiting).
What they are now demanding is the very same right everybody else has.
It is a legal, secular right that is being discussed nothing more than
that.
Every persons in the US have exactly the same rights with regards to
marriage as does every other person.
Any unmarried, adult male has the right to marry any unmarried, adult
female who will have him. An adult, unmarried homosexual may not
marry the adult of his choice.
Neither may an adult lesbian marry a 13 year girl . But if you homos
ever get your way they will
Your inability to refute my point is noted as well as your absurd
strawman and pathetic attempt at an insult. You really have no
argument do you?
Thomas P.
None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has got nothing on," said a little child.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
