Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
So are you saying that people like the OP are repressed bisexuals?
more than likely
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
So are you saying that people like the OP are repressed bisexuals?
The please explain, and disprove that a genetic condition that would inhibit the propagation of a species is not a defect or flaw.
I think it's one of the greatest cases in the nation's history. However, it does not stand for what madhatter is trying to make it stand for. One of the things it stands for is the important idea that marriage is a fundamental right, contrary to madhatter's assertion that it is a privilege. He has yet to acknowledge this error. One of the reason's it's a fundamental right is that is central to our very survival. It does not follow that this includes only different-sex marriage, or that this right does not extend to same-sex couples. In fact, several courts (Iowa, California, Hawaii) have held that it does. As usual, madhatter's reasoning is fundamentally mistaken.
The wheels of justice may grind slowly but grind they do. And what the culture wants will find its way into law; as the history of the last 200 yrs clearly shows.:yes:
Enjoy your bigotry while you can Hatter.
Homosexuality is the easiest way to satisfy one's unbridled sexual preoccupations. If one wants to have sex without any fear of rejection or responsibility, homosexuality is the way to go. Children are never an issue. And if one wants children, one can make selections from orphanages and donor banks to suit one's personal tastes (but again, this isn't the important issue).
Among guys, they can get exactly what they want and not really have to support anyone. They can slap each other around if that is want they enjoy, etc., etc., etc.
Lesbians, don't have to care about the agressions of their "mate" whom they can much easily handle. They don't have to make any effort to explain emotional issues which they both share anyway.
Yeah but this is from a guy who thinks blow jobs are against God....
Frankly I enjoy satisfying my unbridled sexual preoccupations within heterosexuality
I'd describe them, but I would be banned
Not everyone finds sex dirty and disgusting...and some of us do more than just penetration in bed....:sarcastic even hetero couples too!
...
ok I just read this
Lesbians, don't have to care about the agressions of their "mate" whom they can much easily handle. They don't have to make any effort to explain emotional issues which they both share anyway.
This is hilarious...sadly you are sincere, this is a big steaming pile of dingo feces
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...-actually-improve-human-gene.html#post1759166
Interestingly, instead of addressingthe subject, you merely heckle it.
and 1500 species of animals rely on genetic code that produces flaws and defects
because It is only sexuality that produces offspring in a species that reproduces sexually. It is much different than other behaviors at a fundamental level.All human behaviors and propensities, and causes for these behaviors and propensities, exist as spectrums - why would sexuality be any different?
because It is only sexuality that produces offspring in a species that reproduces sexually. It is much different than other behaviors at a fundamental level.
If your assertion was true, proposition 8 in California would not have passed. It was decided by the voters. The Majority rules in the voting booth. Currently, "popular culture" does not include same-sex marriage.OK, I actually read the decision and you are BOTH wrong. The issue was decided only on the grounds of race. Nowhere is the decision is the question of gender ever mentioned. That some state courts have relied on this decision to grant a right to SS marriages is a stretch. Doubtless the SC will have to rule on this matter in a few years. But for the moment legally there is no federal case that supports SS marriage. And the DoM act which prohibits it is still law.
However the decision also says what Auto alleges, that marriage is a right not a privilege. It just doesnt say SS marriage. And no federal court has either.
So we are back to what is a marriage.
My point previously was that the SC follows the election returns. That law is a creature of culture and the fact that the SC has decided is not evidence of anything other than it decided. I suspect what our devout and earnest opponent of SS marriage realizes is that the tide of cultural forces is decidedly against his position and he is hoping the law will stop that tide. It never has. He (as others have noted) is grasping at straws. The wheels of justice may grind slowly but grind they do. And what the culture wants will find its way into law; as the history of the last 200 yrs clearly shows.:yes:
Enjoy your bigotry while you can Hatter.
On a strictly fundamental level, it is.This is assuming that the only function that sexuality serves in human beings is reproduction. This is simply not that case.
*grabs pontoon boat*On a strictly fundamental level, it is.
Yeah but this is from a guy who thinks blow jobs are against God....
Frankly I enjoy satisfying my unbridled sexual preoccupations within heterosexuality
I'd describe them, but I would be banned
Not everyone finds sex dirty and disgusting...and some of us do more than just penetration in bed....:sarcastic even hetero couples too!
...
ok I just read this
Lesbians, don't have to care about the agressions of their "mate" whom they can much easily handle. They don't have to make any effort to explain emotional issues which they both share anyway.
This is hilarious...sadly you are sincere, this is a big steaming pile of dingo feces
On a strictly fundamental level, it is.