Thread: Imagine how stupid you will look in 40 years

Originally Posted by michael h

I think we need your definition of perverted.

No we don't. The final bastion of Liberalism is semantics. According to Perverted - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Definition of PERVERTED
1
: corrupt

To which you will doubtless ask what the definition of corrupt is. Again, per Corrupt - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Definition of CORRUPT
transitive verb
1
a : to change from good to bad in morals, manners, or actions; also : bribe b : to degrade with unsound principles or moral values
2
: rot, spoil

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

No we don't. The final bastion of Liberalism is semantics. According to Perverted - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Definition of PERVERTED
1
: corrupt

To which you will doubtless ask what the definition of corrupt is. Again, per Corrupt - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Definition of CORRUPT
transitive verb
1
a : to change from good to bad in morals, manners, or actions; also : bribe b : to degrade with unsound principles or moral values
2
: rot, spoil

You are still applying your values to what is corrupt. Quite simple ... you desire to define what corruption is. I find controlling others behavior is corrupt when you take their liberty of consensual relationships. Corrupt.

- - - Updated - - -

Ever watch other people having sex in video's? Is that perverse?

Originally Posted by michael h

You are still applying your values to what is corrupt. Quite simple ... you desire to define what corruption is. I find controlling others behavior is corrupt when you take their liberty of consensual relationships. Corrupt.

I am NOT controlling others. Gays can and do get married all the time; they just cannot get legally married. You are pretending gays NOT controlling the electorate is the same as the electorate controlling gays.

AND AGAIN it is not me defining what corrupt is but biology. The parts don't go together. Humans reproduce sexually and that means heterosexually. Therefore, it is you who are perverting and corrupting as you want to play word games with not only why we have sex but why we have legal marriage.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

I am NOT controlling others. Gays can and do get married all the time; they just cannot get legally married. You are pretending gays NOT controlling the electorate is the same as the electorate controlling gays.

AND AGAIN it is not me defining what corrupt is but biology. The parts don't go together. Humans reproduce sexually and that means heterosexually. Therefore, it is you who are perverting and corrupting as you want to play word games with not only why we have sex but why we have legal marriage.

Why can't gays get legally married? Control issues of heterosexuals .. that is controlling. Majorities and the more powerful have always controlled minorities by force.

How does biology define corruption? Hetero's have anal and oral sex ... the parts do go together well enough to achieve orgasm. That seems to be a functioning system ... more so when the consenting adults care for one another.

On the other hand biology also works for children ... are you suggesting children should be breeding because they have the biological parts to do so?

Originally Posted by michael h

Why can't gays get legally married?

I think we've covered this. LOL Because they cannot produce children. It would be a violation of the equal protection clause of the US Constitution to give equal entitlement to unequal contribution to society.

Originally Posted by michael h

On the other hand biology also works for children ... are you suggesting children should be breeding because they have the biological parts to do so?

Does your perversion know no bounds? From a biological perspective, a child, by definition, CANNOT (yet) reproduce and like homosexuals cannot legally marry.

Reality is your enemy. You want to make arbitrary arguments that go against nature and the facts of life.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

I think we've covered this. LOL Because they cannot produce children. It would be a violation of the equal protection clause of the US Constitution to give equal entitlement to unequal contribution to society.

Best to draw back and fall on a portion of the quote ... then to address the points. Child rearing is subsidized by gays through taxation. They are basically paying for your heterosexual sex. Tell me about being entitled to pay for your morals as you steal money from gays.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

I think we've covered this. LOL Because they cannot produce children. It would be a violation of the equal protection clause of the US Constitution to give equal entitlement to unequal contribution to society.

A sterile couple are equally unable to have children so should they be unable to marry?

Again comparing SOME heterosexuals to ALL homosexuals. That is not an equal comparison.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

Does your perversion know no bounds? From a biological perspective, a child, by definition, CANNOT (yet) reproduce and like homosexuals cannot legally marry.

Reality is your enemy. You want to make arbitrary arguments that go against nature and the facts of life.

A child cannot reproduce huh? Well your immoral heterosexual advocates know better. Reality is indeed your enemy as hetero's do indeed like to have intercourse with children. Its OK though the biological functions and hole are there for sex. Sick ... very immoral.

Lina Medina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lina Medina (born September 27, 1933, in Ticrapo, Huancavelica Region, Peru) is the youngest confirmed mother in medical history, giving birth at the age of five years, seven months and 17 days. She currently lives in Lima, the capital of Peru.

Originally Posted by michael h

Best to draw back and fall on a portion of the quote ... then to address the points. Child rearing is subsidized by gays through taxation. They are basically paying for your heterosexual sex. Tell me about being entitled to pay for your morals as you steal money from gays.

That is a great argument to abolish legal marriage not to have gay marriage.

Originally Posted by michael h

A child cannot reproduce huh? Well your immoral heterosexual advocates know better. Reality is indeed your enemy as hetero's do indeed like to have intercourse with children. Its OK though the biological functions and hole are there for sex. Sick ... very immoral.

This has to be the biggest Appeal to Strawman I've ever read! You are pretending my opposition to gay marriage is based on my supporting sex with children. Both are immoral for the same reason and showing some abnormal 5 year old who is able to reproduce does not change the biological criteria of what a child is compared to an adult.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

That is a great argument to abolish legal marriage not to have gay marriage.

Abolish legal marriage and stop expecting gays to subsidize your child rearing and sex. Then you have equality.