Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-11-2014, 06:26 AM
 
Location: Austin
15,656 posts, read 10,428,470 times
Reputation: 19571

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by gretsky99 View Post
How true, how true. Fascism is alive and well in the land of the "free". If someone has ever made an un-PC statement or supported a currently verboten cause, you may be fired, ostracized or financially ruined by the PC police. Scary times.

Consider carefully what political cause you donate to, what you film or write on any social media site, Folks. Those words will follow you forever....and could ruin you. Even 20 years from now. Who knows what will be deemed "unacceptable speech" in the future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-11-2014, 06:28 AM
 
7,359 posts, read 5,472,657 times
Reputation: 3142
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmqueen View Post
Um, thanks for proving my point. Whatever it is that you posted in something only faintly resembling English … you're completely allowed to think it, even though somewhere today, a gay couple is getting married. Isn't it awesome how that works?
It's funny because I actually agree that gay people should be able to marry. Nobody's sexuality bothers me in the slightest. But your condescending attitude makes feel about you the same way that I feel about how neo-Nazis deserve free speech. Tip for you: you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. You give your cause a bad name when you act with such hostility and arrogance and play right into your opponents' hands.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2014, 06:33 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,649 posts, read 26,433,425 times
Reputation: 12660
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmqueen View Post
No, they are not. They do not carry the same benefits and protections under the law that marriage does.

You need to come up with a new excuse for bigotry, that one is completely false.

You are also avoiding the question.

The civil unions I proposed are equal (and I think you knew that) so you'll have to come up with another reason to oppose them.



So what do you say?

Civil unions for homosexuals who want to marry their own sex that will be exactly equal in every way to the marriages heterosexuals have and you can have them today without one peep from anyone on the right provided these new civil unions are not called marriage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2014, 06:33 AM
bUU
 
Location: Florida
12,074 posts, read 10,725,960 times
Reputation: 8798
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
My plan was to not **** with existing marriage laws in the first place,
In other words, your preference was to leave the persecution of homosexuals intact. Yes, I assume most people gathered that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
but since that is something homosexuals won't accept, we'll have to find an honest alternative.
Then why would you have posted such ridiculously deceptive claptrap as you posted, rife with the impracticable suggestion to change thousand upon thousands of laws, just to pander to your semantic persnicketiness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Calling me a bigot is repudiation?
No one called you a bigot. Rather, the repudiation I referred to was the thorough and comprehensive repudiation of the perspective you expressed as bigoted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Yeah, I saw those excuse laden word salads you posted while you were looking for the door.
In other words, you realized that you couldn't come up with a legitimate defense to the thorough and comprehensive repudiation I posted, so you decided to try to spew this smokescreen insinuating that it didn't do what it actually did, i.e., discredit what you advocated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Absolute horse ****!
Your reply indeed was that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2014, 06:38 AM
 
6,073 posts, read 4,768,308 times
Reputation: 2638
I am going to coin the phrase "pro straight."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2014, 06:48 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,649 posts, read 26,433,425 times
Reputation: 12660
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlassoff View Post
Actually it's the very definition of bigotry.

Not engaging in homosexual behavior yourself is not bigotry.

Telling other grown adults what to do because you personally don't like it-- That's bigotry. Especially when it's based on an attribute over which they have no control.

By "attribute over which they have no control", do you mean disgust with unusual sexual practices like homosexuality?

'+windowtitle+'
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2014, 07:08 AM
 
924 posts, read 668,368 times
Reputation: 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
By "attribute over which they have no control", do you mean disgust with unusual sexual practices like homosexuality?

'+windowtitle+'
Why do homophobes always have mental images of gay sex floating around their minds?


Do you envision wild orgies when you walk through the mall? Or are you fixated on a single thing that makes someone different? Because that would be bigotry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2014, 07:19 AM
bUU
 
Location: Florida
12,074 posts, read 10,725,960 times
Reputation: 8798
Why do gay men react to pheromones like straight women, instead of like straight men?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66171og-u_Y
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2014, 08:05 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,472 posts, read 7,117,461 times
Reputation: 11722
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU View Post
It's amusing that you'd bring up delusion, given that government has been making laws about marriage since before there was a United States. Your delusion to the contrary blinds you to the reality. If you cannot base your comments on the reality around you, please understand that your comments are rendered worthless.
Don't be so obtuse, you know exactly what I meant.

Yes, government has been making laws about marrige and a litany of other things that it has no business legislating since the advent of organized government.

But that does not make it right.

I reiterate:

It is none of your business who I marry.
It is none of my business who you marry.
It is none of the governments business who marries who or why or what any of us choose to do in our bedrooms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2014, 08:11 AM
bUU
 
Location: Florida
12,074 posts, read 10,725,960 times
Reputation: 8798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dooleys1300 View Post
Don't be so obtuse, you know exactly what I meant.
I know what you meant. The question is whether you do, and whether you have the integrity necessary to admit it, plainly and without equivocation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dooleys1300 View Post
Yes, government has been making laws about marrige and a litany of other things that it has no business legislating since the advent of organized government.
A comment which is nothing but your own, personal, opinion, a state that wouldn't be notable except that it is shared by a such a very small minority. While the purpose of a democratic republic is to protect minorities from tyranny of the majority, your perspective in this regard is so much a fringe perspective, and the manner by which the vast majority disagree with you causes you so little personal encumbrance, its impact being limited almost exclusively to the comparatively petty matter of finance and commerce, rather than that of (the true meaning of) liberty and of justice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dooleys1300 View Post
But that does not make it right.
Your saying so doesn't make it wrong. More over, your saying so doesn't mean it should be changed to suit you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dooleys1300 View Post
I reiterate:
Reiterating what is not true (i.e., that government doesn't or shouldn't have a role in laws regarding marriage) doesn't make it true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:37 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top