Prop 8?

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Sorry dear I know we would live in a far better country if the Supreme Court consist of one judge by the name of Debra however the court have never rule the way you would wish on the equal protection clause as we both know.

Dear condescending jerk: Never? You are a liar. The existence of rulings in equal protection cases such as Loving v. Virginia, Lawrence v. Texas, Romer v. Evans, etc., makes your statement a LIE.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Of course not but once more it was not I who was trying to used religious as a tool to win points for gay rights.

Well, you're not the only one in this thread, many people are making an argument against gays using religion. I don't think it has a place, but you like I can just ignore it for more relevant discussion.

T
K
O

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Yes and what is your point?

That laws should not reflect what the society view as good or evil if it have any religion element in it?

Being naked in public will get you arrested and that is a culture/religious driven law.

Most of our legal system is impacted by our common culture that have a large religion element to it.

Women are not allow to sell their bodies openly at least not for direct payment is another example that come to mind in most of the country.

I am sure that Debra will find that they have a constitution right to do so however<grin> right along with gay married.

Lord it would be amusing if Debra could decide what the constitution really mean I am sure that even Madison and Jefferson would be rolling over in their graves as a result of the very first few of Debra rulings.

0 Replies

@Debra Law,

I am sure I am a liar dear however picking out narrow rulings and placing as must spin as possible on them does not mean that the court have used the equal protection clause in the manner that you would like them to.

There is no right to gay married and to allow such a right in my opinion would be if not a violation of the equal protection clause, as you would like to view it, would at least be highly unfair to single people who would have wealth taken from them for no good reason and transfer to gay couples.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

I am sure I am a liar dear however picking out narrow rulings and placing as must spin as possible on them does not mean that the court have used the equal protection clause in the manner that you would like them to.

There is no right to gay married and to allow such a right in my opinion would be if not a violation of the equal protection clause, as you would like to view it, would at least be highly unfair to single people who would have wealth taken from them for no good reason and transfer to gay couples.

Again with this 'steal from single people' idiocy. Just come out and say it: you think you're superior to gays and don't want them to have the same rights as you, and this is the basis of your objection.

Admit it, bigot. Have the courage to admit it. That's what all your ridiculous arguments boil down to.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Why would I feel superior or not superior to a whole class of my fellow citizens?

Let see the great homosexual British computer/mathematician scientist Turing for example was far superior to myself for example in all aspect of intellect at least.

Yes I am sure that there are many others his name just came to mind mainly because he was driven to suicide due to facing a year or so behind bars in England for being gay after being one of the main reasons England was able to break the German machine code during the war.

In any case just because I do not see any reason or any justice to licensing private sexual relationships that does not impact the society one way or another that I have any dislike for any given person that happen to be gay.

Now the so call gay movement and the means it cheerfully apply to try to get it way from the start with a three day riot, to the taking over of the APA yearly meanings in the 1970s, to the act out group behavior in the 80s-90s and of course the current nonsense such as 1950s style blacklists I do feel contempt for.

And of course your behavior on this thread with trying to label anyone who would dare to disagree with you with the label of bigot.

To sum up I don’t hold the whole class of my fellow citizens that are homosexuals in contempt only people that had try hard to earn my contempt such as yourself.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

to the act out group behavior in the 80s-90s

What is the 'act out group behavior' of the 80's-90's?

If you don't feel superior to someone else, bigot, why do you seek to deny them rights? The same rights that everyone else has? Because you disapprove of their lifestyle.

You reduce their desire to marry to 'licensed sexual relationships' to demean them. They want to have families the same way as straight couples do. As many homosexuals wish to have kids as heterosexuals. The fact that they have to go outside of the marriage to get the genetic material is immaterial and frankly none of your goddamn business, just as what a straight couple does to have a kid is none of you business. So what's left? Only your contempt for them.

Face it and admit it to yourself and the thread. Enough of this tired dance of justifications for your bigotry.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Quote:

And of course your behavior on this thread with trying to label anyone who would dare to disagree with you with the label of bigot.

You are a bigot; the homophobic kind. Too bad you're blind to your own ignorance.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Silly little rabbit where do I start with you.

The Act out Group have the wonderful and charming habit of attacking meetings of public health groups ETC as they did not feel that enough resources was going into HIV research. I am fairly sure that youtube would have some of their uncivil behavior and I will check when I get done on this post.

You claim that gay couples will ever be a major center for the raising of children seem highly unlikely to me even if they all wish to be parents and we allow them to adopt every child up for adaptation in the society. The numbers are just not there. Teens out of wedlock births are way down and the percent of even young girls that keep their babies is way up. If I am proven wrong then come back to me then and I will support gay married, but not to then.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Quote:

There is no right to gay married and to allow such a right in my opinion would be if not a violation of the equal protection clause, as you would like to view it, would at least be highly unfair to single people who would have wealth taken from them for no good reason and transfer to gay couples.

Your opinion is full of BS and bigotry. You keep saying "wealth being transferred to gay couples." Where do you dig up this BS? Please show us evidence that this is happening? What's the difference of a heterosexual couple in poverty having ten children? Please explain the difference to me, because I'm lost in your maze of BS.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Look up the taxes laws of the US to start with!

Then look up the SS laws.

How silly can you be.

0 Replies

If single people would have wealth transfered to gay couples how is that any different than now? By your logic, single people are already having wealth transfered to married straight people. Beyond that, if it was a transfer of wealth from single people, that would also include gay singles wound it not?

How is this only a problem if gays get money? You need to think through your arguments more.

Your SS and health benefits argument sinks.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@Diest TKO,

I cover this a hundred times at least on this thread!

Lord heterosexual marriages need to be supported as they are the engive for raising the next generation in this society.

If a gay relationship fail it tend to effect only the two people involve however if a heterosexual marriage fail it is far far more likelyto harm children.

The society have a stake in a heterosexual relationship lasting for many decades at least it have no such need in supporting gay relationships.

Therefore tansfering wealth to aid family units have a purpsose and a benefit to the whole of society that is not the case for gay couples.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM, Why do we need to keep propogating the human race? We're growing so fast, we can't even feed all those who are living today. If a couple has more than two children, it increases our human population by multiples that continues to grow. You don't even understand the basics of population growth, and your position is "raising the next generation in this society."

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

First you will find that the birth rate is below replacement level in both European and Japan currently and if it was not for emigration our population growth in the US would be around zero also.

Second whatever the birth rate is or should be we have an obligation to raise and protect the children that are born.

Seem somewhat strange my friend that you are constantly whining about being fair to adults and their rights in regard to homosexual marriages, however you seem to think that children should not be protected by society.

Shaking my head. You are very strange for either a gay or straight person.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

Oh, now, you want to influence the populations of Japan and Europe? ROLFMAO

You have lost all common sense and logic. I'm otta here.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Oh, now, you want to influence the populations of Japan and Europe? ROLFMAO

You have lost all common sense and logic. I'm otta here.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are very strange and I am not sure why I should take my time however when the hell did I say that I care about the birth rate in either Japan or Europe?

You are a complete nut case.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Quote:

... however you seem to think that children should not be protected by society.

Show me where I stated such a stupid idea. Your imagination is running away from what I write.

As for Japan and Europe, you make the case through what is called "inference."

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Let see the only reason I posted concerning about the birth rate of either Japan or Europe was to address your claim about large population growth and any sane person would had known that.

Now your post also address the idea that there are already too many humans and as I never in any of my many many postings express any concern about population growth or lack of same only my concern about the welfare of children that already been born I was somewhat confused over what your point was or was not. Sorry I did not know that you did not have a point.

In any case did what you claim to had done I INFERNECE you are asking me why I should care about such children as we already have too many people in your opinion.

You are a nut case.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

But you wrote:

Quote:

Lord heterosexual marriages need to be supported as they are the engive for raising the next generation in this society.

This is what is happening to human growth on this planet. Try to absorb the consequences of the continued growth in the human population - if you can (which I seriously doubt).

Population Issues

REFER A Friend >

Quote:

Home :: Population Issues
Population Issues

It took all of human history until 1830 for world population to reach one billion. The second billion was achieved in 100 years, the third billion in 30 years, the fourth billion in 15 years, and the fifth billion in only 12 years. In 2005, world population exceed 6.5 billion people, growing by nearly 80 million per year with virtually all of the growth taking place in the poorest countries in the world, where population already strains economies, environments and social services.

Rapid population growth causes or exacerbates poverty, hunger, environmental degradation, economic stagnation, resource depletion, disease and illiteracy " a surefire formula for global insecurity.

Population - General
Population Challenges - the Basics
[updated April 2006]
Achieving a world population in balance with its environmental resources is crucial to the future of our planet and the welfare of its people. Population growth is a complex issue that directly or indirectly impacts all aspects of our lives and the conditions under which we live----from the environment and global stability to women's health and empowerment.

2 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know