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.
Don't force Harrier to endorse or accept it, and don't shove it down his throat.
Oh get over yourself. No one expects you to endorse or accept anything and nothing is being shoved down anyone's throat. Don't like gay marriage? Don't have one.
All these months and years of nonsense and you're still posting the same meaningless garbage.
Why do gay army troopers always make inane
references to things that have nothing to do with homosexual "marriage" like
referring to Loving v Virgiinia or women's suffrage?
Black people
are men and women, and the definition of marriage is a union between a man and a
woman, and that is what SCOTUS did is Loving v Virginia - they upheld marriage
as a union between a man and a woman.
The 19th Amendment simply extended
the vote to a group of people to whom denying it served no purpose.
Gay
marriage serves no purpose and is not a right.
Government involvement in
marriage also serves no purpose, and should be abolished.
Have whatever
relationship you want, do what you wish in your home, and call it whatever you
want.
Don't force Harrier to endorse or accept it, and don't shove it
down his throat.
Perhaps Harrier should just close his mouth.
Problem solved.
Oh get over yourself. No one expects you to endorse or accept anything and nothing is being shoved down anyone's throat.
Really?
So, the clear will of the people of California was not overruled by an openly gay man in a black robe?
The state of California was forced to endorse gay marriages and Harrier as a Californian is part of the state of California.
Strike one.
If Harrier wanted to become a baker in Colorado, but didn't accept homosexual marriages as being valid, then he could choose to not bake a cake for such an event?
A baker in Colorado was forced to accept homosexual marriage.
Strike two.
Two gay people didn't stand on top of a float during the Rose Parade and conduct a "wedding" ceremony in front of families with children who came to see the bands, horses, and floats, not a freakish display of perversion?
Harrier refused to watch that parade - which is the only way he avoided having that publicity stunt shoved down his throat.
And why do people like you have to continually call those with different opinions "haters", "bigots" and "prejudiced".
He didn't say he hated gays. He didn't say he wanted to harm them. He clearly said they can do anything they want.
Perhaps you just can't stand the fact that there are millions upon millions of people who do not agree that being gay is okay.
So go be gay...but it will never be considered normal by the majority.
You are being paid lip service (no pun intended) by the millennial sheeple.
Thank you.
What the gay army doesn't seem to understand is that they are the aggressors.
It is they who want to promote their lifestyle, force acceptance of homosexuality on the rest of us, and redefine societal norms and institutions.
It is their responsibility to make an argument as to why their lifestyle should be endorsed by the people who they are forcing it upon.
No one cares what gay people do in the privacy of their homes, and if they kept their sexual lives private then there wouldn't be any backlash against them.
It was their choice to be militant, be bullies, and make their lifestyle center stage.
Now they are claiming victimhood.
What a joke.
When you poke someone in the eye, don't expect them to be docile and not react.
So, the clear will of the people of California was not overruled by an openly gay man in a black robe?
The state of California was forced to endorse gay marriages and Harrier as a Californian is part of the state of California.
Don't be daft. The STATE's endorsement of gay marriages doesn't rope YOU into such a marriage! Cannot you understand that? Those people getting married are complete strangers, to you, are they not?
Oh, and kudos for bringing the cake baker into the issue. No gay marriage thread on this forum can continue without someone bring THAT red herring into it. I believe its probably in the Terms and Conditions.
What the gay army doesn't seem to understand is that they are the aggressors.
It is they who want to promote their lifestyle, force acceptance of homosexuality on the rest of us, and redefine societal norms and institutions.
It is their responsibility to make an argument as to why their lifestyle should be endorsed by the people who they are forcing it upon.
No one cares what gay people do in the privacy of their homes, and if they kept their sexual lives private then there wouldn't be any backlash against them.
It was their choice to be militant, be bullies, and make their lifestyle center stage.
Now they are claiming victimhood.
What a joke.
When you poke someone in the eye, don't expect them to be docile and not react.
Honestly the above is just one more reason why there should be a rule that those who are not married and those who have no reasonable expectation of marriage of any kind ever in their life (except, apparently, to their pet), should be disallowed from having a say -- and especially, from having a VOTE --in this debate.
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.
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.
