60
   

California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

Forums: Gay Marriage, California, Marriage Equality, Politics, Mindless Bigotry
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
reasoning logic
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 02:40 pm
@hawkeye10,
I am not sure that Spendius needs any more info like that. I could be wrong but he seems as he might be having an inner struggle with himself.
No pun intended Spendius!

I heard him talk about how easy it would to be gay and the amount of money he could have saved and being that he is a single lonely man and now you are bringing multiple partners into the picture.
I do not know about most of you but I could only dream of a few women at one time because I had never had the chance to have more than one at a time but oh well!
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 02:43 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
A biased study for sure!
Given that science has been blocked from this inquiry by the gay political pressure groups I have to assume that the conventional wisdom that gay men tend to be sluts is true. Until science is allowed in and proves otherwise I will go with this assumption.
reasoning logic
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 02:51 pm
@hawkeye10,
I am sure that they are like us to a degree! Would most heterosexual men have more than one partner at a time if they could?
Most people I know would say yes but I do realize that does not speak highly for the crowd that I know.

Just as there are heterosexuals that would not want more than one person, I am sure that there are gays that would only want to be committed to one person!
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 02:53 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Quote:
So you have a wife, five kids, hopefully a fulltime job, where to you find the time to post moronic remarks on a message? I feel sorry for your family.


What does finding the time to post messages have to do with whether they are moronic or not? Which said-- do you only approve of messages being posted by unemployed singles who have not yet successfully mated: in the Darwinian sense?

Where on earth does a handsome young man with no ties find time to do anything but indulge his sensuality? When I was in that phase I hardly had the time to take in nutrient such were the obstacles placed in my way by the female sex in order to test my qualities.

One of the problems with homosexuality is that it is too easy. Or so I gather from the reports I have read about a wink getting the business done in those bars where homosexuals gather. A fetching glance. A nod.

No flirting. No seduction. No frilly, flouncy petticoats. No delerium. No madness. No agonies. No irony. Terrible songs.

It's like coshing ants with a hammer and thinking you're big-game hunting.

How is the interest kept up when the domination/submission dynamics have no mystical underpinning. It can only be a sort of office politics surely. One might submit to a lady of culture and refinement in deference to the timeless superiority of the feminine with some sort of formal ritual but how can one submit to another man. And half needs be in submission mode. Men are supposed to compete with each other at doing things--not at looking good. Boxers would sooner get knocked out than submit.

Submitting to a lady is a whole other category of philosophical thought than submitting to a man. It is that difference which, it seems to me, explains the cultural discrimination against homosexuality rather than the homosexuality itself.


Who says that either man has to SUBMIT? This comes back to your sexist idea that woman have to submit to men... Seriously... Submit means that you BOTH become monogamous but it does not mean you lick your mates boots.

Marriage is not submission it is liberation. Marriage is not shackles it is wings.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 02:55 pm
@RexRed,
Quote:
Marriage is not shackles it is wings.


I can tell you never been married before!
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 02:57 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Or do you think that the feminine is not superior and that the only sex worthy of your attention is your own?


Why does either sex have to be SUPERIOR? Can't they both just be what they are, unique in equality and individuality, both having their own particular strengths and weaknesses that balance out. There are strong women and strong men there are passive men and women. To each their own, love whom you prefer.
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 02:58 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic wrote:

Quote:
Marriage is not shackles it is wings.


I can tell you never been married before!
Is the cup half full or half empty? If you really love the person you wish to marry than marriage is the doorway into the heaven of their heart.

Perhaps straights do need gays to "redefine" marriage.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 03:06 pm
@RexRed,
Trust me you do not want to know! Just kidding I love my wife even though I think she is crazy but that's just me because I have been with her for 28 years!

I do hope that you are able to have the same struggles that I have being married because I think you would like that!

Both of my grandparents were married for life and my uncles from both sides of the family told me that they could not believe that they stayed together for life because they argued.

I thought that they had the best marriages in the world but I guess they were on their best behavior while I was there.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  3  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 03:08 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
A biased study for sure!
Given that science has been blocked from this inquiry by the gay political pressure groups I have to assume that the conventional wisdom that gay men tend to be sluts is true. Until science is allowed in and proves otherwise I will go with this assumption.


Gay men have also not been permitted marriage... take away marriage from straights and see who becomes sluts...

Considering that less than 50% of straight marriages last, that sounds pretty slutty to me.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 03:09 pm
@RexRed,
Quote:
Why does either sex have to be SUPERIOR? Can't they both just be what they are, unique in equality and individuality, both having their own particular strengths and weaknesses that balance out. There are strong women and strong men there are passive men and women. To each their own, love whom you prefer.


That's just media platitude and euphemistic sentiment mush to me Rex.
reasoning logic
 
  2  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 03:11 pm
@RexRed,
Quote:
take away marriage from straights and see who becomes sluts...


I think that you may be speaking one of those philosophical truths that you are known for!
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 03:12 pm
@spendius,
Excepting ZIT and VIZ magazines of course. I forgot about those.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 03:13 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Quote:
Why does either sex have to be SUPERIOR? Can't they both just be what they are, unique in equality and individuality, both having their own particular strengths and weaknesses that balance out. There are strong women and strong men there are passive men and women. To each their own, love whom you prefer.


That's just media platitude and euphemistic sentiment mush to me Rex.
Much like your gray matter can be huh? Smile
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 03:20 pm
@RexRed,
spendi never understood that male chauvinism existed since human history.

That was centuries before there was anything resembling media.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 03:23 pm
@RexRed,
That's as maybe Rex. It depends how art is appreciated.

I'm one who those who sees a lady's whatsit in every Rosarsch ink blot test paper.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 03:28 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
spendi never understood that male chauvinism existed since human history.


That shows how little you know about hunan history. All the Easter Island lot left behind was their phallic symbols.

Check out the Venus of Willendorf. Read The Great Mother by Erich Neumann.
reasoning logic
 
  0  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 03:47 pm
@spendius,
Do you believe every book you read to be absolutely true and able to answer the problems you face in life?
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 04:56 pm
@reasoning logic,
What problems? It's a breeze. A bowl of cherries. Did you not know rl?
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 05:10 pm
@spendius,
Spendius I think that you know that I kid around with you at times and it is because you are not so emotional so I do not think that it would bother you as it would others that are more emotional.

I do find it odd though because most beliefs have an emotional attachment to them and that is why I think they are so hard to let go of!

You seem to have allot of traditional beliefs that you would like to see continue, Are there any of these beliefs that you were taught that might need changing?

What do you think about this old religious belief?

Less commonly practiced, and more controversial, is metzitzah b'peh, (alt. mezizah), or oral suction,[11][12] where the mohel sucks blood from the circumcision wound. The traditional reason for this procedure is to minimize the potential for postoperative complications,[13][14] although the practice has been implicated in the spreading of herpes to the infant.[15]
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Jun, 2011 05:18 pm
@reasoning logic,
Well spit is a disinfectant. I always spit on any cuts I get. I got it off dogs.

Urine is too. Especially champagne vintage.

I think any problems with herpes could be dealt with by better recruitment of the mohels.
 

Related Topics

New York New York! - Discussion by jcboy
Prop 8? - Discussion by majikal
The anti-gay marriage movement IS homophobic - Discussion by blatham
Gay Marriage - Discussion by blatham
Gay Marriage -- An Old Post Revisited - Discussion by pavarasra
Who doesn't back gay marriage? - Question by The Pentacle Queen
"Anonymous" hacker group takes on Westboro Baptist Church - Discussion by contrex
Doesn't banning gay marriage strip people of their basic rights? - Question by xxxx
An interview with Chris Kluwe and Brendon Ayanbadejo - Question by wmwcjr
Defense of Marriage Act Ruled Unconstitutional! - Discussion by tsarstepan
 
  1. Forums
  2. » California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban
  3. » Page 76
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 11/25/2024 at 06:51:42
▲ ▼