Vermont Legislature Legalizes Gay MarriageFollow

Someone should let the Jeremiah project know that sado-masochists are already allowed to get married & stuff.

If by disagreed you mean holding your hands over your ears and yelling no, maybe. I don't recall him addressing any of the points Jophiel brought up. Also, my you're wrong addresses his root theorem that it's all about the kids, as well as the idea that there isn't value in encouraging stable same sex relationships the way we do for opposite sex relationships. Really the other thread was much better.

Edited, Apr 10th 2009 8:41am by Xsarus

Omg! the super-sneaky subversive ghey agenda is already succeeding.

You seem to have missed the marriage part. As it is gay marriage being legalized, then they would be married and would receive all the same benefits of a married couple. Makes sense to me.



I've been waiting for actual evidence for this claim for ages.



They can't donate blood? Really? Is that a law? Because if it is, it's a terribly ridiculous one. Assuming that they would use a different needle every time, the way needles are handled during use, and that they can detect the std before the actually use the blood for anything else, it's a law that applies only to rare occasions where someone pricks theirself with the used needle.



I thought that there was something in your constitution about the separation of church and state, so, whether the founding fathers were christian or not really doesn't apply to how the government is today.



No they don't. Your government collects taxes I assume so that they can invest them in programmes meant to better the quality of life(and so that they can just hand it away to bankers and companies who did stupid things), so in collecting taxes(which don't put you back all that much ********* the government is giving you more freedom by making things accessible to you that would not be if they didn't have your tax money.

If I have the point of collecting taxes is the US wrong, by all means please tell me, I didn't look this up.



Are you really trying to compare homosexuality to paedophilia and ****(not a huge fan of it myself...)? If you are, you must be grasping at straws because you're not communicating your point effectively enough.



I disagree, but I'm not going to try and defend an industry that I'm not too fond of.

Also, I don't see being a **** star to be unsavory. So people have sex for a living, so what? They have a job, they make money, the do their thing. A **** star is no different in the end than anyone else...they just **** a lot more.



I agree with you to a point. You elected your representatives and senators so you voted in the people who are either in favour or against it so in the end, you checked the box for the person who makes that decision likely knowing their views on the topic . If the guy you voted for lost, oh well, better luck next time. It would be great if they could just put it up for a nationwide vote(as though it were an election) but that never seems to happen...




Man, you watch some kinky ****.



Ok, I'm going to go read the constituion now...


...5 minutes later...

Didn't find that religion part. Also, if you're sayign this because of the mention of "under God", did it ever occur to you that:

A. Christians, Jews & Muslims pretty much worship the same god?

B. Some religions have more than one god.

C. This was likely in there because the people writing it were christians and not because they wanted to create a Christian state?



You've been talking about NAMBLA and pedos a lot lately varrus, trying to tell us something?

Wow, where to begin...

According to what?So some dude spanking it at 2am is the reason for children born out of wedlock? And here I thought it was a lack of knowledge/availability of birth control...Societies in the past married around the 12-year-old age because they only lived into the 30's. So you know, there's the whole "continuation of the species" thing.

Yeah. That people are short-sighted, bigoted, and poorly educated. Oh, and that religion is a tool of control. It controls your opinion, and now has totally messed up your sense of justice, equality, decency, and pretty much everything else about you.

You really underestimate your nation.











Oh, it could happen, but as it's something we stopped doing, it probably won't happen. I'm saying it can't, I'm saying it probably won't.



I think that I'm accepting and offering equality to a group of people who were born the way they are and have been treated terribly in the past because of it.



Ok, looking it up.

Huh, how bout that. I was wrong. Now I know something I didn't though, so it's all good.

With modern medical technology though, it would be perfectly acceptable for homosexuals to give blood. I don't see how it really applies to reality anymore.

It means that when AIDS hit, the populace freaked the **** out and had a massive knee-jerk reaction. Now that technology, and indeed most of society's opinion, has caught up, the idea of banning someone from donating blood based on who they do the deed with seems laughable.

That doesn't prevent people like you from being terrified of catching the gay through a blood transfusion, though.

I think it's more that women are such simple creatures that the images of unbridled passion contained in todays **** drives them into a state of frenzied, insatiable lust such that they just can't bring themselves to slow down and use protection.

As a man with many tattoos, of course I do. Does it make anymore sense these days, with our technology, to out right ban a large portion of teh populace (combined) from giving blood? I don't think so.

You also can't give blood if you've ever had sex for money (regardless of the gender), taken some funky medications, have taken any kind of antibiotic in the last month, or forgot to eat this morning.

I get temp deferred about 50% of the time because I'm a coffee addict, and the tannins in coffee interfere with iron absorption. I've still managed to donate almost 3 gallons of whole blood and a pint of platelets.