[OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots

Religions > Atheism > [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 1 of 7

Topic:	Religions > Atheism
User:	"Xomicron"
Date:	07 Apr 2004 07:04:03 PM
Object:	[OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36826
Same-sex adoption ban upheld
Federal court curbs Texas sodomy ruling, decries judicial activism
------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 29, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern
A federal appeals court yesterday upheld Florida's ban on same-sex adoptions,
ruling the landmark Texas sodomy case does not establish a right for
homosexuals to parent displaced children.
The Florida legislature properly judged it is not in the best interests of
its displaced children to be adopted by individuals who engage in voluntary
homosexual activity, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta said.
.

User: "Loose Cannon"
Title: Re: [OT] Snupid trolls on	07 Apr 2004 10:19:22 PM

<BS ng's trimmed>
"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in message
news:c524te$97i$1@news.wplus.net...

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36826

< garbage snippage>
New name, same moronic Snupid.<yawn>
"Age is no guarantee of maturity."~Lawana Blackwell
.

User: "Joseph P"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	07 Apr 2004 10:25:09 PM

At least this one was posted as OT....
--
--
Joe Pribe
NC
jpribe 'at' nc.rr.com <you know the drill
jegp 'at' hotmail.com < at is really @
---- I Love My O|||||||O TJ
"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in message
news:c524te$97i$1@news.wplus.net...
| http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36826
|
| Same-sex adoption ban upheld
| Federal court curbs Texas sodomy ruling, decries judicial activism
|
| ------------------------------------------------------------------
| Posted: January 29, 2004
| 1:00 a.m. Eastern
|
| A federal appeals court yesterday upheld Florida's ban on same-sex
adoptions,
| ruling the landmark Texas sodomy case does not establish a right for
| homosexuals to parent displaced children.
|
| The Florida legislature properly judged it is not in the best
interests of
| its displaced children to be adopted by individuals who engage in
voluntary
| homosexual activity, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in
Atlanta said.
.

User: "Daniel Kolle"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	08 Apr 2004 05:29:51 PM

On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 00:04:03 +0000 (UTC), Xomicron <xomicron@wp.pl>
thought hard and said:

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36826

Same-sex adoption ban upheld
Federal court curbs Texas sodomy ruling, decries judicial activism

------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 29, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern

A federal appeals court yesterday upheld Florida's ban on same-sex adoptions,
ruling the landmark Texas sodomy case does not establish a right for
homosexuals to parent displaced children.

The Florida legislature properly judged it is not in the best interests of
its displaced children to be adopted by individuals who engage in voluntary
homosexual activity, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta said.

Wow. You truly are a *****.
--
-Daniel "Mr. Brevity" Kolle; 16 A.A. #2035
Koji Kondo, Yo-Yo Ma, Gustav Mahler, and Krzysztof Penderecki are my Gods.
Madly Insane EAC Scientist.
.

User: "Dirk"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 09:30:50 AM

Daniel Kolle <DKolle@hotmail.com> wrote in reply to the crossposting
twat

Wow. You truly are a *****.

Nah, his parents probably managed to tie the knot before he popped
out. But they've hated him for it ever since.
Actually, if he imagines the idea here is to prevent new "recruits"
from entering the gay fold, that's silly on its face since FL is ok
with gays acting as foster parents.
But that's not the point of the theocracy in FL at all as I'm sure the
OP knows.
Rather, it's almost exactly like the current fundie platform WRT gay
marriage--"Ok, we'll permit you damned-to-Hell queers to live among us
without having to worry quite so much about being firebombed, but
we'll reserve the right to slight y'all in more subtle ways, like
denying the respectability to enter into binding, lifelong personal
committments. That way we can continue to have our cake and eat it
too--bashing y'all for your promiscuity, *and* bashing y'all for
wanting to commit to monogamy."
With adoption, the fundies can say "we'll let you damned-to-Hell
queers do all the heavy lifting of caring for children and raising
them to be good, productive citizens, but we won't actually
acknowledge this work by allowing y'all to be called 'parents.'"
Oh well. Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition, willya?
.

User: "Xomicron"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 11:12:59 AM

(Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Rather, it's almost exactly like the current fundie platform WRT gay
marriage--"Ok, we'll permit you damned-to-Hell queers to live among us
without having to worry quite so much about being firebombed, but
we'll reserve the right to slight y'all in more subtle ways, like
denying the respectability to enter into binding, lifelong personal
committments. That way we can continue to have our cake and eat it
too--bashing y'all for your promiscuity, *and* bashing y'all for
wanting to commit to monogamy."

Homosexuals can already get married.
.

User: "Snit"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 11:34:03 AM

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3 on
4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to. Are you advocating making a sham of
the whole concept of marriage? I hold marriage, at least in a modern
society, to a higher standard.
.

User: "Dennis Howdy"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 04:32:05 PM

In article <BC9C1E8B.47E76%

says...

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3 on
4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to. Are you advocating making a sham of
the whole concept of marriage? I hold marriage, at least in a modern
society, to a higher standard.

If the institution of marriage is so sacred as certain people
would like us to believe, then why do half of the marriages
end in divorce? The whole concept of marriage is somewhat of a fiction,
because of the divorce rate(at least in the US).
Let's get real.I would bet that those who oppose marriage of
gays, do so not to preserve the so called "concept of marriage", but
really oppose homosexulality. Homosexuality has always
been with us, and always will be. The homophobes need to
deal with thier own inner fears.
-Dennis
.

User: "Snit"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 06:51:44 PM

"Dennis" <Howdy Doody@howdydoody.net> wrote in
107e5injp4cgtdd@corp.supernews.com on 4/9/04 2:32 PM:

In article <BC9C1E8B.47E76%

says...

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3 on
4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to. Are you advocating making a sham of
the whole concept of marriage? I hold marriage, at least in a modern
society, to a higher standard.

If the institution of marriage is so sacred as certain people would like us to
believe, then why do half of the marriages end in divorce? The whole concept
of marriage is somewhat of a fiction, because of the divorce rate(at least in
the US). Let's get real.I would bet that those who oppose marriage of gays, do
so not to preserve the so called "concept of marriage", but really oppose
homosexulality. Homosexuality has always been with us, and always will be.
The homophobes need to deal with thier own inner fears.

I have yet to see a reasoned explanation of why homosexual marriage is bad
that does not rely on homophobia or other forms of bigotry. There have been
a couple of trolls who have claimed that they have other reasons, but they
give themselves away by claiming gays are parasites or other such nonsense.
.

User: "Shaggie"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 07:04:33 PM

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 16:51:44 -0700, Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net>
wrote:

You gay people and homophobes bore me. *plonk*
"I can hammer it back into shape later."
:wq!
.

User: "Timberwoof"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	10 Apr 2004 12:53:22 AM

In article <cfee70d3bc0e8475v8q3o2s186djfk2d16@4ax.com>,
Shaggie <me@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 16:51:44 -0700, Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net>
wrote:

You gay people and homophobes bore me. *plonk*

Here's the only thought process I can imagine that would lead to this
result: "Let's see now. The thread has the word "faggots" in it. There's
no possible way that gay people or homophobes could be found here. I'll
just go and see what the thread is all about. OMG! It's full of
homophobes and gay people! Augh!"
What a jerk.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
.

User: "Xomicron"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 09:47:11 PM

Shaggie <me@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:cfee70d3bc0e8475v8q3o2s186djfk2d16@4ax.com:

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 16:51:44 -0700, Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net>
wrote:

I have yet to see a reasoned explanation of why homosexual marriage is
bad that does not rely on homophobia or other forms of bigotry. There
have been a couple of trolls who have claimed that they have other
reasons, but they give themselves away by claiming gays are parasites
or other such nonsense.

You gay people and homophobes bore me. *plonk*

Can't take the heat, eh?
.

User: "Diogenes"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 07:00:52 PM

Shaggie wrote:

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 16:51:44 -0700, Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net>
wrote:

I have yet to see a reasoned explanation of why homosexual marriage
is bad that does not rely on homophobia or other forms of bigotry.
There have been a couple of trolls who have claimed that they have
other reasons, but they give themselves away by claiming gays are
parasites or other such nonsense.

You gay people and homophobes bore me. *plonk*

Is that a Back-door entry?
.

User: "Steve Hix"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 04:42:04 PM

In article <107e5injp4cgtdd@corp.supernews.com>,
Dennis <Howdy Doody@howdydoody.net> wrote:

If the institution of marriage is so sacred as certain people
would like us to believe, then why do half of the marriages
end in divorce?

That is actually misleading.
While the number of divorces in a year might be half of the number of
marriages, the count is skewed by people who enter into multiple
marriages (and later divorces).
Half the people who marry do not necessarily end up in divorce; someone
on their third or fifth marriage has skewed the results.
.

User: "Xomicron"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 12:06:11 PM

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C1E8B.47E76%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3 on
4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to.

There's no law that says a person can marry whoever they want.

Are you advocating making a sham of the whole concept of marriage?

Homosexuals are already trying to do that.
.

User: "Snit"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 12:14:09 PM

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C6854973AA8xomicron@0.0.0.1 on
4/9/04 10:06 AM:

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C1E8B.47E76%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3 on
4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to.

There's no law that says a person can marry whoever they want.

Are you advocating making a sham of the whole concept of marriage?

Homosexuals are already trying to do that.

In what way? By saying that homosexuals can marry, you seem to be implying
they can make a sham of the idea of marriage and marry someone they are not
attracted to. This is ridiculous. You seem to be wanting to diminish the
institution of marriage, which, to me anyway, represents two people who love
each other and are committed to each other. Now I would not want to
necessarily deny someone the "right" to enter into such a sham marriage, but
to encourage it, as you seem to do, simply makes no sense to me.
The idea that two people of the same sex marrying would somehow weaken the
institution of marriage is not supported. The idea that encouraging people
to enter into marriages which are not based on love, at least in a modern
society, clearly is diminishing the institution.
Then again, the institution of marriage is pretty weak as it is... your
apparent support of reducing its strength would probably not do much.
.

User: "Timberwoof"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	10 Apr 2004 12:47:58 AM

In article <BC9C27F1.47E9F%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C6854973AA8xomicron@0.0.0.1 on
4/9/04 10:06 AM:

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C1E8B.47E76%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3 on
4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to.

There's no law that says a person can marry whoever they want.

Are you advocating making a sham of the whole concept of marriage?

Homosexuals are already trying to do that.

In what way? By saying that homosexuals can marry, you seem to be implying
they can make a sham of the idea of marriage and marry someone they are not
attracted to. This is ridiculous. You seem to be wanting to diminish the
institution of marriage, which, to me anyway, represents two people who love
each other and are committed to each other. Now I would not want to
necessarily deny someone the "right" to enter into such a sham marriage, but
to encourage it, as you seem to do, simply makes no sense to me.

The idea that two people of the same sex marrying would somehow weaken the
institution of marriage is not supported. The idea that encouraging people
to enter into marriages which are not based on love, at least in a modern
society, clearly is diminishing the institution.

Then again, the institution of marriage is pretty weak as it is... your
apparent support of reducing its strength would probably not do much.

Don't even try to point out contradictions in a fundy's thinking. You'll
get nowhere. It is a basic requirement of radical religious
fundamentalism to be able to hold mutually contradictory thoughts at the
same time. For instance, I've heard people give me the following pair of
arguments against enforcing civil rights for gay people:
* It would cost too much to defend the rights of all those gay people.
* There are so few gay people that it doesn't matter anyway if we
discriminate against them.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
.

User: "Snit"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	10 Apr 2004 08:48:33 AM

"Timberwoof" <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote in
timberwoof-164E03.22475909042004@typhoon.sonic.net on 4/9/04 10:47 PM:

In article <BC9C27F1.47E9F%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C6854973AA8xomicron@0.0.0.1 on
4/9/04 10:06 AM:

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C1E8B.47E76%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3 on
4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to.

There's no law that says a person can marry whoever they want.

Are you advocating making a sham of the whole concept of marriage?

Homosexuals are already trying to do that.

In what way? By saying that homosexuals can marry, you seem to be implying
they can make a sham of the idea of marriage and marry someone they are not
attracted to. This is ridiculous. You seem to be wanting to diminish the
institution of marriage, which, to me anyway, represents two people who love
each other and are committed to each other. Now I would not want to
necessarily deny someone the "right" to enter into such a sham marriage, but
to encourage it, as you seem to do, simply makes no sense to me.

The idea that two people of the same sex marrying would somehow weaken the
institution of marriage is not supported. The idea that encouraging people
to enter into marriages which are not based on love, at least in a modern
society, clearly is diminishing the institution.

Then again, the institution of marriage is pretty weak as it is... your
apparent support of reducing its strength would probably not do much.

Don't even try to point out contradictions in a fundy's thinking. You'll
get nowhere. It is a basic requirement of radical religious
fundamentalism to be able to hold mutually contradictory thoughts at the
same time. For instance, I've heard people give me the following pair of
arguments against enforcing civil rights for gay people:

* It would cost too much to defend the rights of all those gay people.
* There are so few gay people that it doesn't matter anyway if we
discriminate against them.

Is this from the same person who claims not to be bigoted against gays but
then says that they are parasitic on heterosexuals (but not on society... no
no no... that is putting words in his mouth!)
.

User: "Xomicron"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 12:18:48 PM

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C27F1.47E9F%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C6854973AA8xomicron@0.0.0.1 on
4/9/04 10:06 AM:

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C1E8B.47E76%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3
on 4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Rather, it's almost exactly like the current fundie platform WRT gay
marriage--"Ok, we'll permit you damned-to-Hell queers to live among
us without having to worry quite so much about being firebombed, but
we'll reserve the right to slight y'all in more subtle ways, like
denying the respectability to enter into binding, lifelong personal
committments. That way we can continue to have our cake and eat it
too--bashing y'all for your promiscuity, *and* bashing y'all for
wanting to commit to monogamy."

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to.

There's no law that says a person can marry whoever they want.

Are you advocating making a sham of the whole concept of marriage?

Homosexuals are already trying to do that.

In what way? By saying that homosexuals can marry, you seem to be
implying they can make a sham of the idea of marriage and marry someone
they are not attracted to. This is ridiculous.

You're right. Marrying someone that one is attracted to is not what
marriage is all about.
.

User: "David Fritzinger"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 01:50:26 PM

In article <Xns94C6854973AA8xomicron@0.0.0.1>,
Xomicron <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote:

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C1E8B.47E76%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3 on
4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to.

There's no law that says a person can marry whoever they want.

Are you advocating making a sham of the whole concept of marriage?

Homosexuals are already trying to do that.

Again, I have to ask (since you never answered the last time I did so),
what is so wrong with homosexual marriage? If the couple that has a
loving relationship next door happens to be, so Jo-anne and Mary instead
of John and Mary, how does this hurt you, or weaken your marriage,
assuming you are married? It certainly doesn't weaken my marriage. And,
I don't see how it hurts society. So, answer the question, Snubis, how
does homosexual marriage hurt heterosexual marriage, or weaken the bonds
between a man and wife?
--
Dave Fritzinger
.

User: "Snit"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 01:53:48 PM

"David Fritzinger" <dfritzin@macNoSpam.com> wrote in
dfritzin-C58307.08502609042004@orngca-news04.socal.rr.com on 4/9/04 11:50
AM:

In article <Xns94C6854973AA8xomicron@0.0.0.1>,
Xomicron <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote:

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C1E8B.47E76%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3 on
4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to.

There's no law that says a person can marry whoever they want.

Are you advocating making a sham of the whole concept of marriage?

Homosexuals are already trying to do that.

And more than that, why would encouraging sham marriages, as he seems to be
doing by commenting that gays can already marry, help anything.
Now it is possible I misinterpreted his statement - he may be in reference
to the places where gays can marry... in which case I can accept that my
comments are not accurate. Somehow, though, I doubt that is what was meant.
.

User: "Xomicron"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 01:56:04 PM

David Fritzinger <dfritzin@macNoSpam.com> wrote in
news:dfritzin-C58307.08502609042004@orngca-news04.socal.rr.com:

In article <Xns94C6854973AA8xomicron@0.0.0.1>,
Xomicron <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote:

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C1E8B.47E76%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3
on 4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Rather, it's almost exactly like the current fundie platform WRT
gay marriage--"Ok, we'll permit you damned-to-Hell queers to live
among us without having to worry quite so much about being
firebombed, but we'll reserve the right to slight y'all in more
subtle ways, like denying the respectability to enter into binding,
lifelong personal committments. That way we can continue to have
our cake and eat it too--bashing y'all for your promiscuity, *and*
bashing y'all for wanting to commit to monogamy."

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to.

There's no law that says a person can marry whoever they want.

Are you advocating making a sham of the whole concept of marriage?

Homosexuals are already trying to do that.

You think that love is the only reason for marriage? No wonder you liberals
have such a shallow view of marriage.
.

User: "Snit"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 01:57:56 PM

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C697EAF4AABxomicron@0.0.0.1 on
4/9/04 11:56 AM:

David Fritzinger <dfritzin@macNoSpam.com> wrote in
news:dfritzin-C58307.08502609042004@orngca-news04.socal.rr.com:

In article <Xns94C6854973AA8xomicron@0.0.0.1>,
Xomicron <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote:

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C1E8B.47E76%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3
on 4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Rather, it's almost exactly like the current fundie platform WRT
gay marriage--"Ok, we'll permit you damned-to-Hell queers to live
among us without having to worry quite so much about being
firebombed, but we'll reserve the right to slight y'all in more
subtle ways, like denying the respectability to enter into binding,
lifelong personal committments. That way we can continue to have
our cake and eat it too--bashing y'all for your promiscuity, *and*
bashing y'all for wanting to commit to monogamy."

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to.

There's no law that says a person can marry whoever they want.

Are you advocating making a sham of the whole concept of marriage?

Homosexuals are already trying to do that.

You think that love is the only reason for marriage? No wonder you liberals
have such a shallow view of marriage.

Nobody has suggested it is the only reason, but to deny it as an important
reason does not fit with the modern view of marriage. Are you claiming
love is not an important aspect in a marriage?
.

User: "Xomicron"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 02:47:22 PM

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C4044.4800B%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C697EAF4AABxomicron@0.0.0.1 on
4/9/04 11:56 AM:

David Fritzinger <dfritzin@macNoSpam.com> wrote in
news:dfritzin-C58307.08502609042004@orngca-news04.socal.rr.com:

In article <Xns94C6854973AA8xomicron@0.0.0.1>,
Xomicron <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote:

Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote in
news:BC9C1E8B.47E76%snit@nospam-cableone.net:

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in
Xns94C67C4B7FDB7xomicron@0.0.0.3 on 4/9/04 9:12 AM:

da_bender@hotmail.com (Dirk) wrote in
news:f1e3e17f.0404090630.690d483b@posting.google.com:

Rather, it's almost exactly like the current fundie platform WRT
gay marriage--"Ok, we'll permit you damned-to-Hell queers to live
among us without having to worry quite so much about being
firebombed, but we'll reserve the right to slight y'all in more
subtle ways, like denying the respectability to enter into
binding, lifelong personal committments. That way we can continue
to have our cake and eat it too--bashing y'all for your
promiscuity, *and* bashing y'all for wanting to commit to
monogamy."

Homosexuals can already get married.

Just not to the person they want to.

There's no law that says a person can marry whoever they want.

Are you advocating making a sham of the whole concept of marriage?

Homosexuals are already trying to do that.

You think that love is the only reason for marriage? No wonder you
liberals have such a shallow view of marriage.

Nobody has suggested it is the only reason, but to deny it as an
important reason does not fit with the modern view of marriage.

The "modern" view of marriage doesn't benefit anyone. I don't understand
how people in my grandparents' generation can get married hardly knowing
each other but stay together a lifetime, yet now people get married after
getting to know each other very well and then they end up getting divorced.
.

User: "Snit"
Title: Re: [OT] No fresh meat for Florida faggots	09 Apr 2004 06:43:45 PM

"Xomicron" <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in Xns94C6A09B12602xomicron@0.0.0.1 on
4/9/04 12:47 PM: