Prop 8 OverturnedFollow

Holy **** is that catchy.

Once again in a thread about SSM Almalique makes me want to rip my own **** off and feed it to rabid animals out of frustration and the fierce desire to no longer share the same genus with a being capable of such blunt retardation, as well as the fear that my ***** could one day create something something so viciously dumb. If I weren't gay.

Largely because of bigots, racists, masochists and homophobes.

But considering we cleared up that problem with the blacks and the ********** with the women, I'm confident we can suss out the ***** haters. Just gonna take time.

Well, it would be a very short court battle. But there would be one.

Yes, there would be a court battle, but it wouldn't be anything to the level of prop 8. You said yourself, it would be a very short court battle. Why is that?

Not to mention, 1/3 of the SCOTUS is women. I think they'd not need much deliberation.




Edited, Aug 23rd 2010 5:56pm by Elinda

Thank you for answering my question.



This is evidence on why the word "homophobe" doesn't make any sense. You can't cram multiple unrelated meanings into one word and then label them "homophobe", which could be any of those definitions.

People like to say "fear", but I doubt many people are actually afraid of homosexuality.

As for me, I can, have and will talk to homosexual males and disregarded the fact that I think that is utterly disgusting. But when they start to get a little too friendly, i.e jokes with innuendos, etc. that makes me uncomfortable. You can't possibly label that as a homophobia.



This is way outfield..

I also doubt most people wake up thinking what "human right" that they can take away from homosexuals to punish them. That's absolutely absurd. Hate groups such as the KKK, sure, but the average person who disagrees with homosexuality, no. I'm sure that no legitimate thought is put on homosexuals from the average person, just the every so often uncomfortable or disagreement feeling when a topic arises.



Well, you're wrong. When you decide to accept the fact that there is a difference between an equal law and a fair law, you'll understand that. An equal law is the exact same for everyone, regardless of who you are. A fair law is genuinely an equal law with exceptions to attend to certain people's needs.

Secondly, it is very possible to have a definition of marriage that excludes members of society without having bigotry. What big and nasty word do you have for people who disagrees with polygamy and all of those other denied members?

These childish name calling is nothing but a mere scare tactic to persuade people to support their cause. If you don't allow me to have multiple wives then you're prejudice against MY religion. It couldn't possibly be any other reason to deny multiple spouses other than you're afraid of MY religion and you want MY religion to be punished, because of course, you're a bigot and a polygamiphobe!!....

That's just silly..

Most people maybe not, but enough people spend time and dollars to insure that homosexuals don't marry to their own sex.

The facts are not on your side.

Not only is homophobia unreal, so are gays. Yeah, they're just an invention of the far right to keep their base on side.

You heard me, Bard. You don't really exist at all.

You're claiming it's acceptable to treat a group of individuals fairly because you find their lifestyle disgusting. Sounds like homophobia to me.

It doesn't matter what you call it - equality, fairness, rights whatever. You're willing to make the distinction. You don't distinguish between groups randomly. You don't simply say red-headed peeps should be treated differently than others, simply because they have red hair. People don't work that way and you know. You can talk your way around it, but the bottom line is if you want to treat gays differently, it's because you don't want to treat them the same. Why?...because you find it disgusting? because you think it will erode the american way of life?

Instead of asking everyone here to support their argument, and then asking them again in different words, and then asking it of another person and then pretending you don't understand, and they jumping on a single word and disputing it's meaning, and then being really stupid again - explain your position.

Why do you think gay people should be denied the ability to marry one another? I don't want to hear about rights or fairness or equality. What harm would come to you your neighbors or our society for allowing two same sex people to marry?

I'll respond to the rest later, but I had to single this out. Evidence of poor comprehension and lack of reading at it's finest.






Really? Did you even bother to read or comprehend that or is it written too poorly for you to understand?

Not only did I say the exact opposite of what you said, I didn't even mention anything about SSM. You just through that in as some fictional argument...

sheesh.. pure nonsense.. I'll be back later

Edited, Aug 23rd 2010 7:50pm by Almalieque

Looking up the actual word, it has three meanings. The first is unreasonable fear or antipahty of homosexuality. The second is intense hatred or fear of homosexuality. The third (which says it's a medical definition) is irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals.

Honestly, it's usually a word I try to steer clear of, but apparently it really is acceptable in any and all of these situations.