"Whites" need only apply!

[Peikko 1,575]

"Whites" need only apply!

I brought this same observation up months ago while debating the gay marriage movement with Fishdude (aka: Number 6, Paul Daniels). It is basically an upper class White liberal movement of the left and right coasts and the gated community crowd in the otherwise flyover zones in-between in the USA. Try as they may to tie it to the Black civil rights movement...that dog don't hunt.

While I don't harbor any hate for homosexuals personally this attempt at cultural parity with the heterosexual mainstream is lame. "Leave it to Beaver" with 2 Ward's or 2 June's is too weird and disgusting to contemplate, but that is the goal. "Heather's Two Mommies" is no figment of the imagination. As far as I'm concerned it is a Lib nightmare most of America wants no part of.

No, its an equal rights movement. What the racial demographics is of said lifestyle choice is altogether something different.

Homosexual marriage is no more of a right than is plural marriage or marriage between close family members. Society at large deems what is culturally acceptable or societal norm. So far, when the states hold referendums that define what marriage is, the definition in the vast majority of America is that marriage is defined as between one man and one woman.

One judges' court ruling does not define societal norms, customs, or culture. There is no precedent that homosexual marriage is a right or a civil right. Funny how the Libs hold Western civilization in contempt, but it is in decadent Western civilization that homosexuality is even contemplated to be in parity with heterosexuality. "Heather's Two Mommies"? That's not even biologically possible, much less accepted in the vast majority of the world's cultures. While many cultures may tolerate homosexuals and homosexuality this is no consensus for homosexual parity with heterosexuality or societal embrace of homosexuality.

Personally I could care less if homosexuals cohabitate or have sex, but to elevate homosexuality to the same level as heterosexuality is biologically absurd. I find it equally disgusting that homosexuals bring children into the debate and somehow try to assert that homosexuality is compatible with a nuclear family.

I have personally observed closeted gay guys that had children through marriage with a woman and then decided to come out of the closet. It not only wounds the woman, but it scars the kids as well. In the 3 instances that I have observed the kids were screwed up and I believe it was directly due to having their world rocked by the fact that daddy was a homosexual. I have no experiences with lesbians with children. Personally I think it is a selfish and f*cked up thing to do to a kid.

Yes, people who live a lie can seriously screw other people's lives up. I wonder why these men lived the lie? Could it because, like normal people they wanted to fit in and have a family, but if they were true to their sexual orientation they could not? Thanks for pointing out exactly why homosexual relationships should be put on an equal footing

[IAMX 3,055]

"Whites" need only apply!

I brought this same observation up months ago while debating the gay marriage movement with Fishdude (aka: Number 6, Paul Daniels). It is basically an upper class White liberal movement of the left and right coasts and the gated community crowd in the otherwise flyover zones in-between in the USA. Try as they may to tie it to the Black civil rights movement...that dog don't hunt.

While I don't harbor any hate for homosexuals personally this attempt at cultural parity with the heterosexual mainstream is lame. "Leave it to Beaver" with 2 Ward's or 2 June's is too weird and disgusting to contemplate, but that is the goal. "Heather's Two Mommies" is no figment of the imagination. As far as I'm concerned it is a Lib nightmare most of America wants no part of.

No, its an equal rights movement. What the racial demographics is of said lifestyle choice is altogether something different.

Homosexual marriage is no more of a right than is plural marriage or marriage between close family members. Society at large deems what is culturally acceptable or societal norm. So far, when the states hold referendums that define what marriage is, the definition in the vast majority of America is that marriage is defined as between one man and one woman.

One judges' court ruling does not define societal norms, customs, or culture. There is no precedent that homosexual marriage is a right or a civil right. Funny how the Libs hold Western civilization in contempt, but it is in decadent Western civilization that homosexuality is even contemplated to be in parity with heterosexuality. "Heather's Two Mommies"? That's not even biologically possible, much less accepted in the vast majority of the world's cultures. While many cultures may tolerate homosexuals and homosexuality this is no consensus for homosexual parity with heterosexuality or societal embrace of homosexuality.

Personally I could care less if homosexuals cohabitate or have sex, but to elevate homosexuality to the same level as heterosexuality is biologically absurd. I find it equally disgusting that homosexuals bring children into the debate and somehow try to assert that homosexuality is compatible with a nuclear family.

I have personally observed closeted gay guys that had children through marriage with a woman and then decided to come out of the closet. It not only wounds the woman, but it scars the kids as well. In the 3 instances that I have observed the kids were screwed up and I believe it was directly due to having their world rocked by the fact that daddy was a homosexual. I have no experiences with lesbians with children. Personally I think it is a selfish and f*cked up thing to do to a kid.

Hey that's great. You're entitled your opinion. Just don't confuse your opinion (as "gross" as it is) for something to have dominion over homosexuals.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Noone is forcing you to watch anything though... And you can't insulate children from things they might see anyway. What about the kids who wander into their parents room in the middle of the night and.see daddy naked and sweating on top of mummy as she moans as if in pain? How are they supposed to make sense of that?

What about the teen who's caught masturbating by his parents?

You can disapprove of whatever you like but on this issue of gay marriage the issue is surely one of simple fairness.

Why are people so scared of sex?

Great points Seis.

Let's add more questions:

what about the child who catches their parents having sex?

what a bout the child who sees mommy/daddy pass out drunk every weekend?

what about the child who sees daddy beat mommy up and drag her by the hair?

[IAMX 3,055]

By the way, since you did cite homosexuality as not having any rights, you might want to be aware that discrimination based upon sexuality is very much illegal throughout the country much akin to gender and race. Given that and the EPC, which has been cited several times especially in California circuits, homosexuals are indeed afforded the right of marriage.

If you want to continue and look retarded (peejay) by comparing homosexuality to pedophilia, be my guest. However, there is no connection and you have quite an uphill battle to prove it.

Edited November 21, 2008 by SRVT

[peejay 327]

"Whites" need only apply!

I brought this same observation up months ago while debating the gay marriage movement with Fishdude (aka: Number 6, Paul Daniels). It is basically an upper class White liberal movement of the left and right coasts and the gated community crowd in the otherwise flyover zones in-between in the USA. Try as they may to tie it to the Black civil rights movement...that dog don't hunt.

While I don't harbor any hate for homosexuals personally this attempt at cultural parity with the heterosexual mainstream is lame. "Leave it to Beaver" with 2 Ward's or 2 June's is too weird and disgusting to contemplate, but that is the goal. "Heather's Two Mommies" is no figment of the imagination. As far as I'm concerned it is a Lib nightmare most of America wants no part of.

No, its an equal rights movement. What the racial demographics is of said lifestyle choice is altogether something different.

Homosexual marriage is no more of a right than is plural marriage or marriage between close family members. Society at large deems what is culturally acceptable or societal norm. So far, when the states hold referendums that define what marriage is, the definition in the vast majority of America is that marriage is defined as between one man and one woman.

One judges' court ruling does not define societal norms, customs, or culture. There is no precedent that homosexual marriage is a right or a civil right. Funny how the Libs hold Western civilization in contempt, but it is in decadent Western civilization that homosexuality is even contemplated to be in parity with heterosexuality. "Heather's Two Mommies"? That's not even biologically possible, much less accepted in the vast majority of the world's cultures. While many cultures may tolerate homosexuals and homosexuality this is no consensus for homosexual parity with heterosexuality or societal embrace of homosexuality.

Personally I could care less if homosexuals cohabitate or have sex, but to elevate homosexuality to the same level as heterosexuality is biologically absurd. I find it equally disgusting that homosexuals bring children into the debate and somehow try to assert that homosexuality is compatible with a nuclear family.

I have personally observed closeted gay guys that had children through marriage with a woman and then decided to come out of the closet. It not only wounds the woman, but it scars the kids as well. In the 3 instances that I have observed the kids were screwed up and I believe it was directly due to having their world rocked by the fact that daddy was a homosexual. I have no experiences with lesbians with children. Personally I think it is a selfish and f*cked up thing to do to a kid.

Time for Len's pic

Dude, wait....

What?

P.S. and to think we live in the same state *sigh*

Maybe you delude yourself into believing the whole world is just like your little cloistered life in liberal academia. It ain't. The peasants on Main Street neither want or desire your vision of America. You will find that out when you get out into the real world.

[bhajishah 4]

Well Im sure the pope would dis approve.. Marriage is basically for support and children, or in some cases here helping a temporary friend to immigrate... Adam and Steve cant procreate. and not jane and Jill .. steve needs to hook up with Jill, and adam with jane. .Biology / ALLAH in pairs. even the scientists can get this one right...HELLOOO freaks

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

"Whites" need only apply!

I brought this same observation up months ago while debating the gay marriage movement with Fishdude (aka: Number 6, Paul Daniels). It is basically an upper class White liberal movement of the left and right coasts and the gated community crowd in the otherwise flyover zones in-between in the USA. Try as they may to tie it to the Black civil rights movement...that dog don't hunt.

While I don't harbor any hate for homosexuals personally this attempt at cultural parity with the heterosexual mainstream is lame. "Leave it to Beaver" with 2 Ward's or 2 June's is too weird and disgusting to contemplate, but that is the goal. "Heather's Two Mommies" is no figment of the imagination. As far as I'm concerned it is a Lib nightmare most of America wants no part of.

No, its an equal rights movement. What the racial demographics is of said lifestyle choice is altogether something different.

Homosexual marriage is no more of a right than is plural marriage or marriage between close family members. Society at large deems what is culturally acceptable or societal norm. So far, when the states hold referendums that define what marriage is, the definition in the vast majority of America is that marriage is defined as between one man and one woman.

One judges' court ruling does not define societal norms, customs, or culture. There is no precedent that homosexual marriage is a right or a civil right. Funny how the Libs hold Western civilization in contempt, but it is in decadent Western civilization that homosexuality is even contemplated to be in parity with heterosexuality. "Heather's Two Mommies"? That's not even biologically possible, much less accepted in the vast majority of the world's cultures. While many cultures may tolerate homosexuals and homosexuality this is no consensus for homosexual parity with heterosexuality or societal embrace of homosexuality.

Personally I could care less if homosexuals cohabitate or have sex, but to elevate homosexuality to the same level as heterosexuality is biologically absurd. I find it equally disgusting that homosexuals bring children into the debate and somehow try to assert that homosexuality is compatible with a nuclear family.

I have personally observed closeted gay guys that had children through marriage with a woman and then decided to come out of the closet. It not only wounds the woman, but it scars the kids as well. In the 3 instances that I have observed the kids were screwed up and I believe it was directly due to having their world rocked by the fact that daddy was a homosexual. I have no experiences with lesbians with children. Personally I think it is a selfish and f*cked up thing to do to a kid.

Time for Len's pic

Dude, wait....

What?

P.S. and to think we live in the same state *sigh*

Maybe you delude yourself into believing the whole world is just like your little cloistered life in liberal academia. It ain't. The peasants on Main Street neither want or desire your vision of America. You will find that out when you get out into the real world.

no, I've already been halfway around the world, it's you who will find out when you leave Main Street USA.

[bhajishah 4]

of NATURE!!!!

[IAMX 3,055]

Maybe you delude yourself into believing the whole world is just like your little cloistered life in liberal academia. It ain't. The peasants on Main Street neither want or desire your vision of America. You will find that out when you get out into the real world.

Have an idea, put down the shitty aphorisms, quit calling your world of idealisms "reality", and move into the 21st century.

Edited November 21, 2008 by SRVT

[Chica Yeyé 41]

"Whites" need only apply!

I brought this same observation up months ago while debating the gay marriage movement with Fishdude (aka: Number 6, Paul Daniels). It is basically an upper class White liberal movement of the left and right coasts and the gated community crowd in the otherwise flyover zones in-between in the USA. Try as they may to tie it to the Black civil rights movement...that dog don't hunt.

While I don't harbor any hate for homosexuals personally this attempt at cultural parity with the heterosexual mainstream is lame. "Leave it to Beaver" with 2 Ward's or 2 June's is too weird and disgusting to contemplate, but that is the goal. "Heather's Two Mommies" is no figment of the imagination. As far as I'm concerned it is a Lib nightmare most of America wants no part of.

No, its an equal rights movement. What the racial demographics is of said lifestyle choice is altogether something different.

Homosexual marriage is no more of a right than is plural marriage or marriage between close family members. Society at large deems what is culturally acceptable or societal norm. So far, when the states hold referendums that define what marriage is, the definition in the vast majority of America is that marriage is defined as between one man and one woman.

One judges' court ruling does not define societal norms, customs, or culture. There is no precedent that homosexual marriage is a right or a civil right. Funny how the Libs hold Western civilization in contempt, but it is in decadent Western civilization that homosexuality is even contemplated to be in parity with heterosexuality. "Heather's Two Mommies"? That's not even biologically possible, much less accepted in the vast majority of the world's cultures. While many cultures may tolerate homosexuals and homosexuality this is no consensus for homosexual parity with heterosexuality or societal embrace of homosexuality.

Personally I could care less if homosexuals cohabitate or have sex, but to elevate homosexuality to the same level as heterosexuality is biologically absurd. I find it equally disgusting that homosexuals bring children into the debate and somehow try to assert that homosexuality is compatible with a nuclear family.

I have personally observed closeted gay guys that had children through marriage with a woman and then decided to come out of the closet. It not only wounds the woman, but it scars the kids as well. In the 3 instances that I have observed the kids were screwed up and I believe it was directly due to having their world rocked by the fact that daddy was a homosexual. I have no experiences with lesbians with children. Personally I think it is a selfish and f*cked up thing to do to a kid.

Time for Len's pic

Dude, wait....

What?

P.S. and to think we live in the same state *sigh*

Maybe you delude yourself into believing the whole world is just like your little cloistered life in liberal academia. It ain't. The peasants on Main Street neither want or desire your vision of America. You will find that out when you get out into the real world.

no, I've already been halfway around the world, it's you who will find out when you leave Main Street USA.

omg peejay, you are funny. Tavo is not in academia. He has traveled more than you ever will though. But you got something right: he is no peasant.

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

Well Im sure the pope would dis approve.. Marriage is basically for support and children, or in some cases here helping a temporary friend to immigrate... Adam and Steve cant procreate. and not jane and Jill .. steve needs to hook up with Jill, and adam with jane. .Biology / ALLAH in pairs. even the scientists can get this one right...HELLOOO freaks

You forgot,

and sometimes daddy beating the ####### out of mommy and treating her like if she wasn't an equal to her partner

ohhhh visa fraud!!! guards!! get him/her!!

Edited November 21, 2008 by TävôLuDô

[Ban Hammer 13,659]

Well Im sure the pope would dis approve.. Marriage is basically for support and children, or in some cases here helping a temporary friend to immigrate... Adam and Steve cant procreate. and not jane and Jill .. steve needs to hook up with Jill, and adam with jane. .Biology / ALLAH in pairs. even the scientists can get this one right...HELLOOO freaks

i'm confused. i thought you were muslim. why is what the pope says important?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

"Whites" need only apply!

I brought this same observation up months ago while debating the gay marriage movement with Fishdude (aka: Number 6, Paul Daniels). It is basically an upper class White liberal movement of the left and right coasts and the gated community crowd in the otherwise flyover zones in-between in the USA. Try as they may to tie it to the Black civil rights movement...that dog don't hunt.

While I don't harbor any hate for homosexuals personally this attempt at cultural parity with the heterosexual mainstream is lame. "Leave it to Beaver" with 2 Ward's or 2 June's is too weird and disgusting to contemplate, but that is the goal. "Heather's Two Mommies" is no figment of the imagination. As far as I'm concerned it is a Lib nightmare most of America wants no part of.

No, its an equal rights movement. What the racial demographics is of said lifestyle choice is altogether something different.

Homosexual marriage is no more of a right than is plural marriage or marriage between close family members. Society at large deems what is culturally acceptable or societal norm. So far, when the states hold referendums that define what marriage is, the definition in the vast majority of America is that marriage is defined as between one man and one woman.

One judges' court ruling does not define societal norms, customs, or culture. There is no precedent that homosexual marriage is a right or a civil right. Funny how the Libs hold Western civilization in contempt, but it is in decadent Western civilization that homosexuality is even contemplated to be in parity with heterosexuality. "Heather's Two Mommies"? That's not even biologically possible, much less accepted in the vast majority of the world's cultures. While many cultures may tolerate homosexuals and homosexuality this is no consensus for homosexual parity with heterosexuality or societal embrace of homosexuality.

Personally I could care less if homosexuals cohabitate or have sex, but to elevate homosexuality to the same level as heterosexuality is biologically absurd. I find it equally disgusting that homosexuals bring children into the debate and somehow try to assert that homosexuality is compatible with a nuclear family.

I have personally observed closeted gay guys that had children through marriage with a woman and then decided to come out of the closet. It not only wounds the woman, but it scars the kids as well. In the 3 instances that I have observed the kids were screwed up and I believe it was directly due to having their world rocked by the fact that daddy was a homosexual. I have no experiences with lesbians with children. Personally I think it is a selfish and f*cked up thing to do to a kid.

Time for Len's pic

Dude, wait....

What?

P.S. and to think we live in the same state *sigh*

Maybe you delude yourself into believing the whole world is just like your little cloistered life in liberal academia. It ain't. The peasants on Main Street neither want or desire your vision of America. You will find that out when you get out into the real world.

Why should the peasants on main street decide on the rights of others. Again I don't get why people care enough to protest something that doesn't affect them.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Well Im sure the pope would dis approve.. Marriage is basically for support and children, or in some cases here helping a temporary friend to immigrate... Adam and Steve cant procreate. and not jane and Jill .. steve needs to hook up with Jill, and adam with jane. .Biology / ALLAH in pairs. even the scientists can get this one right...HELLOOO freaks

I do not give a ####### if Ratzinger approves or not. He is a human, and not as very pleasant one. Maybe he only approves of priests asssfukcing little boys it seems.

Marriage is NOT for having children. What century do you live in? People do not have to reproduce just because their uterus and testis work for f's sake.

[IAMX 3,055]

Well Im sure the pope would dis approve.. Marriage is basically for support and children, or in some cases here helping a temporary friend to immigrate... Adam and Steve cant procreate. and not jane and Jill .. steve needs to hook up with Jill, and adam with jane. .Biology / ALLAH in pairs. even the scientists can get this one right...HELLOOO freaks

Good thing the pope doesn't issue marriage licenses in the U.S. Nor does God, or Allah, or Buddha, Zeus, or the Giant Spaghetti Monster.

You might want to also change your views on Adam and Steve. If your views are that one should be able to procreate to get married, you might want to tell any heterosexual couple that can't bear children, nor want to bear children, they cannot be married. Remember peejay's world of idealisms? Yeah. time to join us here in the "reality" that seems to evade peejay.

Edited November 21, 2008 by SRVT