Well asshole, if you weren't responding to my posts with a condescending retort such as "Think about it for a while and you'll realize you're wrong and I'm right" then maybe I'd treat you with more respect.
As it stands, and in response to your first statement above: Go fuck yourself sideways with a rusty pitchfork.
I think it is your avatar, people look at it and automatically hate you.
You're a moron.
Stop being such a simpleton.
Funny, that's usually my response when I see you post, fucktard.
Well asshole, if you weren't responding to my posts with a condescending retort such as "Think about it for a while and you'll realize you're wrong and I'm right" then maybe I'd treat you with more respect.
As it stands, and in response to your first statement above: Go fuck yourself sideways with a rusty pitchfork.
I think it's the fact that he can't formulate a response without including an insult to the person he's responding to.
And that's just in this thread. But I'm sure I'm just a fucktarded moron for positing the idea that someone might try to be civil if they want to be taken seriously in a rational discussion of ideas.
This is an opinion which literally no one in the country espoused until it became clear that gay marriage was going to become law.
I think it's the fact that he can't formulate a response without including an insult to the person he's responding to.
And that's just in this thread. But I'm sure I'm just a fucktarded moron for positing the idea that someone might try to be civil if they want to be taken seriously in a rational discussion of ideas.
I'm a nice guy, but I have no patience for anyone trying to assert their self-imagined superiority over me. This is why have such absolute disdain for "liberals" on the internet. My girlfriend is liberal and she and I get along quite well. But the "liberals" in this forum are here only to gloat and tell anyone who disagrees with them what horrible, vile, stupid, pieces of shit they are. I have little respect for any of the "liberals" around here. For all I know they're quite pleasant people in real life, but that's not what's presented here.
I don't understand how any rational human being could be against gay marriage. Why do you care who someone loves?
Morality? It is called being a bigot.
Ah, just another liberal parrot, I see?
It's the definition of being a bigot. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see that people who discriminate against people due to their sexual orientation are bigots.
It's the definition of being a bigot. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see that people who discriminate against people due to their sexual orientation are bigots.
Of course you realize that makes lots of gay marriage supporters bigots, because while it's obvious to me that poly marriages should be legal as well, there are many gay marriage supporters who are against them. Of course these gay marriage supporters will trot out the usual "It's too complex legally" and "They just want to molest little girls" arguments which are clear indicators of their bigotry, but you'll never get them to recognize their own bigotry.
Of course you realize that makes lots of gay marriage supporters bigots, because while it's obvious to me that poly marriages should be legal as well, there are many gay marriage supporters who are against them. Of course these gay marriage supporters will trot out the usual "It's too complex legally" and "They just want to molest little girls" arguments which are clear indicators of their bigotry, but you'll never get them to recognize their own bigotry.
I'm all for poly marriages being legal but do you think insurance companies are going to pick up the tabs for 5 wives? They'll find a way to exclude all but the 1st one. Sort of apples and oranges.
This shows how you miss the mark. No one really cares who one "loves", or has sex with...it's about whether or not gay marriage is morally right in the eyes of most opponents, and in my opinion, there are a lot of retards who fear that the "wrath of God" will come barreling down on "his country" if gays are granted nation-wide rights to marry.
FWIW, there are a lot of generally good and rational people who oppose gay marriage, so don't start parroting that "irrational" argument as rationality isn't measured by whether or not one opposes any marriage, unless you're willing to admit that its irrational to oppose object marriage -- after all, why do YOU care what someone loves?
They can do it for a person with 5 children, just substitute "children" with "wives"...they won't skip a beat.
Oh good, Nehalem logic.
Objects cannot give legal consent; being able to give legal consent is required for marriage.
Love whatever object you want, legally you cannot marry an object.
Next time, try considering the context of that statement. Not advocating for "object marriage", just showing the hypocrisy in doubledeluxe's logic.
I haven't used logic. I have used a point of fact definition of what a bigot is.
LOL - the proper equivocation would be interracial marriage and gay marriage, but you had to deliberately draw a false equivocation (white superiority to marriage equality) to add force to your point.Whether one morally believes that white people are superior to black people or that gay marriage is wrong they are still a bigot.
Missed that, good catch
Yeah I considered that but that won't fly. If I add a WIFE, it's one extra cost, if I add 1,2,3,4,5 kids it falls under FAMILY plan. I'd bet that each wife will have to be added at their own cost, then what of all the multiple kids with multiple wives, insurance companies have limits and they will find a way.