Thread: Imagine how stupid you will look in 40 years

Originally Posted by michael h

Actually I'm looking at this as a taking issue. Using force to impose your sexual perversions on others.

That is what you are doing. You want gays to take from society in equal measure to heterosexual couples despite their non-equal, sexually perverted contribution that cannot result in the next generation of citizens.

We reproduce sexually and that is not perversion but biology. Sexual behavior that cannot result in procreation is the perversion and I do not care who does it; just don't expect to receive from the public treasury for it.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

That is what you are doing. You want gays to take from society in equal measure to heterosexual couples despite their non-equal, sexually perverted contribution that cannot result in the next generation of citizens.

We reproduce sexually and that is not perversion but biology. Sexual behavior that cannot result in procreation is the perversion and I do not care who does it; just don't expect to receive from the public treasury for it.

In the eyes of the gay individual ... you are the pervert ... engaging in disgusting sex. Life, liberty, property, is about the individual and THEIR choices ... not about your forcing your choices on them.

You keep touting the next generation. Shall we take away the rights of hetero's who chose not to have children? Not everybody is so inclined to overpopulate the earth as you are.

Perversion is in the eyes of the beholder. Your perverse act of having hetero sex is offensive to some ... disgusting. If you had more "Control" of gays choices you could "force" your beliefs on them, but we know their beliefs wouldn't change. The only thing that would hold a gay to your beliefs is the fear of how you would harm them.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

That is what you are doing. You want gays to take from society in equal measure to heterosexual couples despite their non-equal, sexually perverted contribution that cannot result in the next generation of citizens.

We reproduce sexually and that is not perversion but biology. Sexual behavior that cannot result in procreation is the perversion and I do not care who does it; just don't expect to receive from the public treasury for it.

I presume you are at odds with your church since it performs same-sex marriage?

Originally Posted by michael h

In the eyes of the gay individual ... you are the pervert ... engaging in disgusting sex. Life, liberty, property, is about the individual and THEIR choices ... not about your forcing your choices on them.

You keep touting the next generation. Shall we take away the rights of hetero's who chose not to have children? Not everybody is so inclined to overpopulate the earth as you are.

Perversion is in the eyes of the beholder. Your perverse act of having hetero sex is offensive to some ... disgusting. If you had more "Control" of gays choices you could "force" your beliefs on them, but we know their beliefs wouldn't change. The only thing that would hold a gay to your beliefs is the fear of how you would harm them.

Speaking as one of the few token gays here... I don't think heterosexual sex is perverted or disgusting. I don't think that any sex between two consenting adults is perverted or disgusting. Sex is sex. There's nothing that gay people do that heterosexual people don't do as well. I also don't think that what two people (or five people for that matter) do in the privacy of their homes should have any bearing on social and legal equality. When you see people whose main objection is the sex... that just shows emotional immaturity. Noone looks at a hetero couple and the first thought that comes to their minds is "I wonder what kind of sex those people are having" but there sure seems to be an awful lot of obsession about what kind of sex gay people are having. In other words... the problem isn't with the sex... it's with those that are unnaturally obsessed over it.

Originally Posted by Unique POV

Speaking as one of the few token gays here... I don't think heterosexual sex is perverted or disgusting. I don't think that any sex between two consenting adults is perverted or disgusting. Sex is sex. There's nothing that gay people do that heterosexual people don't do as well. I also don't think that what two people (or five people for that matter) do in the privacy of their homes should have any bearing on social and legal equality. When you see people whose main objection is the sex... that just shows emotional immaturity. Noone looks at a hetero couple and the first thought that comes to their minds is "I wonder what kind of sex those people are having" but there sure seems to be an awful lot of obsession about what kind of sex gay people are having. In other words... the problem isn't with the sex... it's with those that are unnaturally obsessed over it.

I've known gays who the thought of having hetero sex is disgusting. Much the way a hetero would think gay sex is disgusting ... their is no attraction. I've also known gays to go both ways ... primarily gay but trying hetero sex also. I've had sex with a gay chick ... a good friend, that I protected from a couple bullies when we were out drinking. From then on if neither of us scored looking for women ... we had each other ... but I knew she was primarily interested in women. I understood it was natural for her to seek women ... not deviant as some suggest. My reference to disgusting is the natural inclination of someone to be attracted to someone else. Some like them fat, skinny, of color, not of color, big, small, but mostly they like what they like ... not what their told to like.

Originally Posted by michael h

I've known gays who the thought of having hetero sex is disgusting. Much the way a hetero would think gay sex is disgusting ... their is no attraction. I've also known gays to go both ways ... primarily gay but trying hetero sex also. I've had sex with a gay chick ... a good friend, that I protected from a couple bullies when we were out drinking. From then on if neither of us scored looking for women ... we had each other ... but I knew she was primarily interested in women. I understood it was natural for her to seek women ... not deviant as some suggest. My reference to disgusting is the natural inclination of someone to be attracted to someone else. Some like them fat, skinny, of color, not of color, big, small, but mostly they like what they like ... not what their told to like.

I get you... and I was speaking only for myself... as if anyone could ever speak for an entire group of anything. I will admit to having seen hetero couples with small kids and both parents pushing 350lbs, then wondering to myself how they ever got their parts close enough to one another to conceive.

Originally Posted by USCitizen

I presume you are at odds with your church since it performs same-sex marriage?

Not at all. It is private people practicing their religious beliefs and not adding to those receiving public entitlements.

Originally Posted by michael h

In the eyes of the gay individual ... you are the pervert

The game your playing does not alter the reality of sexual reproduction.

Originally Posted by michael h

I've known gays who the thought of having hetero sex is disgusting.

That is not the political issue but I know Leftists only argument is as such. In other words disgust is not a requirement to recognize degenerate behavior.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

The game your playing does not alter the reality of sexual reproduction.



That is not the political issue but I know Leftists only argument is as such. In other words disgust is not a requirement to recognize degenerate behavior.

You call peoples liberty a game ... actually its merely force to impose your will on a minority. What is altered in sexual reproduction by gays? They may or may not choose to have children. Nothing is altered ... they reach orgasm ... which for me is the "point" of sex.

Degenerate behavior once again is by your definition ... your imposition over the word. You insert "your" interpretation for corrupt.

The key words that keep coming back is you, your, you believe, you think, relative to the rights and behavior of others. The imposition of "your" beliefs on others is merely "your" force to "take" liberty and choices from others.

Fact many gays find heterosexual sex disgusting ... they are not attracted to the sex "you think" they should be attracted to.

Originally Posted by michael h

You call peoples liberty a game ... actually its merely force to impose your will on a minority. What is altered in sexual reproduction by gays? They may or may not choose to have children. Nothing is altered ... they reach orgasm ... which for me is the "point" of sex.

Degenerate behavior once again is by your definition ... your imposition over the word. You insert "your" interpretation for corrupt.

The key words that keep coming back is you, your, you believe, you think, relative to the rights and behavior of others. The imposition of "your" beliefs on others is merely "your" force to "take" liberty and choices from others.

Fact many gays find heterosexual sex disgusting ... they are not attracted to the sex "you think" they should be attracted to.

I really don't care what others find attractive or disgusting, as long as they don't try to shove their version, which I might find disgusting, down my throat. No one, not even the government, has the right to intrude and dictate what goes on behind someone else's bedroom doors. I really don't want to know.

Now why is that such a difficult concept for some to grasp? Leaves me befuddled. It really does. Leave it in the bedroom, and leave me out of it. Don't put it on parade. I don't want to know, and I don't want to see it, and I don't agree that my children need to see it on display to legitimize it.

Originally Posted by Nemo

The difficulty in applying a moral standard to the law was illustrated by the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Roper v. Simmons. In that case, the court ruled that the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment forbids the imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were under the age of 18 when their crimes were committed. In reaching that decision, the court interpreted the provisions of the Eighth Amendment in reference to “evolving standards of decency” in the implementation of the death penalty that canvassed the several states as well as the law of international tribunals. In a separate dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia,who is not shy when it comes to reconciling his personal morals and religious beliefs with his legal opinions, became surprisingly secular in his views, accusing the majority of proclaiming itself the “sole arbiter of our Nation’s moral standards . . .” in a process that he likened to “counting Amishmen.” See Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005).

I get your point here and I don’t actually disagree with it.

What you are saying is that the courts should ignore morality when it comes interpreting law or making a ruling based on the law. In this you are correct.

But my point still stands, because laws are born out of legislative acts and there is a moral impetus behind them. Furthermore, human rights [the reason we have laws is to protect them] is fundamentally a moral issue.

That’s why murder is both the ultimate transgression against human rights AND immoral all at once.

Originally Posted by michael h

Yank ... how about a reply ... are you really worried about where I put my dick, as opposed to replying to the post? Do you visualize and get taken off topic?

Again, this is not about your sexual perversions. If it makes you feel better, since I know that you libs are all about what feels good, it's not about my sexual perversions either (or lack of).

Originally Posted by michael h

You call peoples liberty a game

Stealing from people is not a liberty. An entitlement is not liberty.