So nowwe have fags saying marriage isnt a humna right, but its a fundemental right for those declared eligible to marry by the state, marriage is awarded based on age, gender and the fact you can only be married to one person at a time. The state, and we the people that make society have the RIGHT to deny faggots the right to marry as they fail to meet the legal parametres for awarding of a marriage lic.
@all028 Well thats not naturaland is not what IVF was created to achieve, IVF has been hijackedby self interestedsick lesbo minorities. Gay men should NEVER be allowed to raise children EVER.
@AverageRidesAgain IVF denial would be most likely handled by the states human rights act and has absolutely nothing to do with ssm. There was a case in CA not to long ago.
Civil marriage really has nothing to do with love. The State cannot regulate love, that’s both insane and impossible. Marriage is about procreation, which is in principle impossible between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman. When two men or two women can figure out how to procreate, this debate will become relevant.
@TheConservativeGent I get what you're saying, but what about heterosexual couples who can't conceive children? That wouldn't stop them from getting married though, so I don't know if it would even come down to that.
@Cornelio101 Correct, but one man and one woman can, on principle, procreate. The fact that in one instance the man and the woman cannot procreate does not damage the institution. This is where the true divide between Conservatives and Liberals arises. The Conservatives, whether they can articulate it or not, believe society benefits from heralding the life-giving union of one man and one woman; the family truly is the foundation of our society, and celebrating that union is essential.
@ElSeedyMinotaur Marriage highlights the sanctity of life and the importance of the natural family. If we abandon traditional marriage we admit that there is nothing unique or sacred about the union that creates life. Concurrently, we make the union of marriage less about children and more about the desires of two adults. Marriage should be, and always has been, about creating the best environment for children, which is naturally their mother and father.
@TheConservativeGent I don't know why you feel that YOUR interpretation of marriage is what marriage has 'always' been about... I fear you haven't really researched 'marriage' if you feel that is the case, friend.
@ElSeedyMinotaur That’s a good deal to respond to. I’ll answer the comments that make sense. I don’t interpret anything, first of all. Go back to the beginning of Christian Rome, in the middle of the 4th Century A.D. Marriage was between one man and one woman. Our civilization has a distinct definition of marriage that is taken from the Sacrament of Matrimony. Understanding Matrimony is essential to understanding civil marriage, and that definition is one man, one woman for procreation.
I'm discussing the civil contract... you can decide to celebrate whatever you like in your home or your church. That impacts this civil contract not at all, sorry.
@ElSeedyMinotaur No, that isn’t what I believe, nor did I claim that it did. I acknowledged that Western civilization draws its definition of marriage from the Christian faith. If you’re dealing exclusively with civil contracts, fine. Gays can have civil unions. If we’re discussing ‘marriage’, we need to acknowledge the traditional, social, and spiritual implications of the very word. Changing the definition is arbitrary and ignores the purpose of the word.
@TheConservativeGent 'Marriage' is a civil contract. That's what we're discussing. You told me to go back to the beginning of Christian Rome and look at the definition of marriage then... why?
At least TWO Roman Emperors married men... married them. You know, if we're talking 'traditions' that need to be 'acknowledged.'
Sarcasm? Perhaps I'm just answering the comments that 'make sense?' (wink)
@ElSeedyMinotaur Before you jump the gun, this is NOT an issue with separation of establishing a state religion( (1st Amendment), it is an issue of understanding from whence we draw our definition. If you wish to rid civil marriage of religious influence, disregard the word itself. It’s an inherently theological term. Even with religious freedom, we as a society should still celebrate the unique life-giving union of one man and one woman, a.k.a. marriage.
@TheConservativeGent The idea that 'marriage' is an inherently theological term is also laughable...
I suppose that when we speak of 'marrying' two metals that is, in fact, theological in nature? That when we say a wine 'marries' well with a cheese that we mean that they are literally joined spiritually and legally in a church?
Heh.
Sorry, the idea that language is immutable is about as laughable as your understanding of the word 'marriage.'
@TheConservativeGent The states that are legalizing same sex marriage have to treat same sex couples who want children the same as any couple that can't have children. Good try.
GAY marriage being legal its nothing like the segregation of black back then! No comparison. ...ppl are born black.. .not GAY.. .its a choice.... I agree with McCain on this one
@PUNKIN7714 So, please explain to me why homosexuality is so prevalent in other species, and I guess that I can vouch for myself in saying that I have never chosen or made a conscious decision that I was gay. I'm sorry that you can't understand that.
@zztstenglish Another thing, at least I don't hide my account unlike you. Typical pussy.. lmao HAHAHAHA awww you're not a real man, you're just a whiny coward. It figures!
@karimmtorger - LOL! Karimtorger's account was initially cloaked until I called u out on it. Hypocrite! I only hid my channel cus I was constantly getting threats. be right back
@zztstenglish You didn't called me out on it.. Try uploading a video with your account cloaked. No one can view it. Gee, stop putting your face up your ass, will ya please? HAHAHA
@zztstenglish - I'm convinced you no longer care about the validity of your position (giving you the benefit of the doubt that you 'ever' cared). If you had, you would not go on such rampant trails of redundancy...
@all028 - Now see mercatornet: economic of same sex marriage: "An institution is a collection of expectations, norms & humanly devised constraints that work together towards some social objective"
@all028 - See Maynard v Hill("Other contracts may be modified, restricted, enlarged or entirely released upon the consent of the parties. Not so with marriage. The relation once formed, the law steps in and holds the parties to various obligations & liabilities. It is an institution..."
oh man some of these homosexuals are pretty gross. It's one thing to want equal rights, but to re-define an institution that has stood for thousands of years simply for your own ego is pushing it pretty far.
@ElSeedyMinotaur I saw your friend Veru post something about the SCOTUS saying in 1959 something about Marriage being a fundamental right to mankind & essential to his survival. Guess thats a reason. Also, I can't find evidence of Polyamory being bad for children, unlike Polygamy. In case of tragedy, Polyamory allows children to still have 2 parents. I can still work, while the other cares for the children & provide emotional support. Things like that.
@ElSeedyMinotaur INCORRECT. Marriage isnt and has never been a human right, as children dont have it, human rights are that with which we are born, fucking fail cunt hahahahaha
@AverageRidesAgain No one said that marriage is is a human right. It has been declared a fundamental right for those people who are of the age of consent to marry. Get your facts straight.
@ImperialGenKlenner - Yup, the Loving court wrote "Marriage is...fundamental to our very existence and survival"
Marriage wouldn't be 'fundamental' to our very 'existence' and 'survival' if it was de-linked from (or had nothing to do with) the reproductive potential.
@ImperialGenKlenner - And then the Loving court's subsequent actions CONFIRM what those quotes mean when they dismissed gay marriage in Baker v Nelson. The Loving was not talking about gay marriage when they declared it a right.
@ElSeedyMinotaur where did you come up with this notion that i think there can only be one purpose of each part of the human anatomy? use sense and remember any possible use isnt an intended one
@didickcheeseburger Remember, this is not about winning or losing. This is about who got the skills in economics, sociology, philosophy, politics, finance... the resourses, the reaching power, the institutions, control of things, like Schools, the Internet, Hollywood & the media... When it comes to The Powers that Be playing Chess, every single move counts & domino effects are everywhere. The Chess pieces, are the children...
@ElSeedyMinotaur After everything you just said to Burger King, do you still want me to provide an argument about why Poly has to be next, or have you finally realized everything single word that comes out of your mouth is that argument.
@didickcheeseburger What about masturbating? Is that natural? Do YOU masturbate? Look, I understand your point about 'natural' but do you have anything else? Anything?
@all028 contrary to what a lot of people say, masturbating is not natural. the purpose of your load is to make a baby...not to accidentally get on your computer keyboard or in your eye. im not saying i do no wrong. i havent judged any homos for humping dudes. ive just gave some facts and my personal opinion on homosexuality. i have no problem with any gay people. just dont ask me to endorse it.
no i dont have anything else. the whole topic of discussion is its against god and nature
@ElSeedyMinotaur disregarding religion, the natural purpose of mating is obviously reproduction. its not an interpretation of any kind. if youd use your common sense youd see that. you cant win lol
@ElSeedyMinotaur uh no. have you forgotten that your nutsack is attached to your peehole as well as your bladder? its the only natural way to pee as well as the only natural way to reproduce.
@aquatix be careful with your wording. im strictly speaking about the natural purpose of sexual intercourse. just because people do it for fun doesnt mean its the intended purpose as nature dictates
@didickcheeseburger Well, it is a proven stress reliever and strengthens relationships... it seems to have many 'natural' purposes... just like your penis.
@ElSeedyMinotaur so the semen shoots out into the woman to make them feel closer? lol. the things you describe, if true, are called byproducts. not the end result that nature intends.
@didickcheeseburger - It seems rather the opposite, sir. Do you understand what the term 'natural' means? Natural does not infer what one 'ought' to do with their sexuality. It simply implies that which can be found in nature.
Now, you could say natural is that which is 'usually' found in nature but that still does not imply that is something one 'ought' to do or conform to...
if he is for love, then he should NOT be against gay marriage. Love is love no matter who it is and if you want to marry someone of the same gender, you should have the right to. A black person can marry a white person and that used to be wrong
@all028 I don't think you are... didick may have another opinion. Apparently, he's very concerned with the parts of the Bible that he thinks promote bigotry. When he reads it.
@zztstenglish very interesting about Doctor Geronimo. are you also aware Nasa has a space probe headed to Mars called Curious. Should arrive in about 6-7 months. Fascinating stuff!
gay marriage is a sin .being gay is wrong and unnatural. god intended men and women to be together and that is the way he made us wired. i pray to god that this abomination of gay marriage ends.being gay ruins the morals of our society.being gay has brought so much disease to this world.
@twittytumbles And I pray that you will understand that the founding fathers created a country of religious freedom and didn't want one religion to rule the nation. Please read An Act for Establishing Religious Freedom by Thomas Jefferson. It's online for free.
Being gay doesn't create any disease. Being promiscuous can and that applies to everyone gay straight bi and those who don't indentify with an orientation. Educate yourself.
@twittytumbles Sorry, but there are no bible verses that says gay marriage is a sin. Also being is not wrong or is it unnatural. Have Jesus ever met a gay or lesbian person? No! Did God mentioned in the bible that gays are wrong and unnatural? No! If you are referring to Leviticus or Romans Chapters, then you are biblical illiterate. I can debunk your false teachings and show that you're not a true Christian. All you're doing is slandering people, that is a sin. Duh!
@didickcheeseburger "thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind; it is an abomination". it looks pretty clear to me. this can't be "debunked""
Oh yes it can be debunked because it's translated incorrectly. Aww. you really are biblical illiterate.
@didickcheeseburger You do realize you are reading a translation maybe spanning several translations of a 5000 + year old text? Besides our country and our laws are not based on the Bible.
@didickcheeseburger How do you equate that passage with don't allow two men to engage in an adult, consensual, monogamous marriage in the year 2012 in the United States of America?
@jfsfrnd you know the phrase "do i have to spell it out?" my last bible quote clearly forbids sexual relations between man and man. also anywhere marriage is referenced in the bible it is always between a man and a woman.
youre playing the childs game of "technicalities". like when mom says dont touch the cookie jar so you reach in without touching the jar. its obvious that the bible prohibits that kind of relationship between people of the same sex.
@ElSeedyMinotaur ive read parts of the bible based on issues i wonder about. its never really been a big concern of mine to randomly see if its ok to eat clams and crabs lol
@ElSeedyMinotaur cotton blends? lol. i guess ill let my beard grow. i wont eat shellfish and ill start wearing polyester. you gonna quit being a homo?
@ElSeedyMinotaur its not a false assumption that homosexuality is unnatural. man and woman can bear fruit while man and man bear no fruit. its common sense.
@ElSeedyMinotaur no because man and womans intent is still to reproduce together even if one or the other is defective. it doesnt make their relationship unnatural just because they dont function properly. now man and man on the other hand are not made to naturally reproduce in the first place. this defines their relationship as unnatural.
@ElSeedyMinotaur its not even a matter of me "deciding". reproducing is what sexual activity exists for. youre mistaking a desirable byproduct as the purpose.
@ElSeedyMinotaur im not personally deciding. if the purpose of sex wasnt to reproduce then wed be extinct. its nature to ensure the survival of a species by reproducing. dont be ridiculous.
@didickcheeseburger Or is the world considerably more complex and nuanced than the idiocy your comfort level allows you to accept? (see your Leviticus 'knowledge' for an example)
@trevortrevortsr2 im not sure of your point. are you suggesting same sex marriage as population control? i dont think whether or not homos get married is going to affect whether they reproduce or not. if theyre gay then theyre not reproducing anyway. the possibility of marriage will have no bearing on such an issue
@aquatix It would seem that the 'primary' purpose of genitalia is the expulsion of waste... (you certainly use them that way long before you can even begin to have sex)
@aquatix dont try to generalize what im saying. im speaking strictly about the natural purpose of sex. there is no equally valid purpose for sex. people may use sex for any purpose they choose but ultimately the acts ONLY natural purpose is reproduction. PERIOD.
@ElSeedyMinotaur you can look back into my earlier comments for that. this conversation has went way off course. that being said just consider that i reply to what people say to me
@ElSeedyMinotaur youre awesome. thats clearly not what i meant at all. have you gotten so desperate that you resort to intentionally misquoting me? a valiant effort lol
@ElSeedyMinotaur yeah its out of context. when god says NOT to lay with men as with women it might actually mean he wants you to lay with men. lol. theres nothing to interpret. the verse is clear.
@ElSeedyMinotaur if you look at past comments for this video, outlawing same sex marriage was never my point. i still maintain its wrong and unnatural but i feel it should be a freedom of choice.
@didickcheeseburger Some Biblical scholars take that verse to mean not to be bisexual because there is no point to tell a homosexual not to lay with men like he does with a woman.
@jfsfrnd that sounds like a gay persons attempt to twist the bible to suit his desires. and a weak one at that. the verse is clear and the message is obvious.
We the majority makes the rules, if you dont like it tough luck. Assimilate or perish.
AverageRidesAgain 1 hour ago
i <3 being bi. deal with it!
alexcia321 3 hours ago
Point is IVF wasnt created to allow lesbians to raise children in unnatural family stuctures.
AverageRidesAgain 3 hours ago
Karim challenged:
"lol keep dreaming that you have any control of my life. Come on, removed this clip.. I have more to upload.. :) hahaha dance baby dance"
And the clip is gone hahahahaha
AverageRidesAgain 3 hours ago
@AverageRidesAgain Your silly rants are ridiculous.
jfsfrnd 3 hours ago
So nowwe have fags saying marriage isnt a humna right, but its a fundemental right for those declared eligible to marry by the state, marriage is awarded based on age, gender and the fact you can only be married to one person at a time. The state, and we the people that make society have the RIGHT to deny faggots the right to marry as they fail to meet the legal parametres for awarding of a marriage lic.
AverageRidesAgain 3 hours ago
LOVE ellen! she's such a classy and funny person.
JBizhot 6 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent Well there is such a thing called A.I (Artificial Insemination) for homos to procreate
all028 7 hours ago
@all028 Right, and heterosexual couples can use it, too. But that doesn’t make same-sex couples a life-giving union.
TheConservativeGent 6 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent Where is the law that mandates marriage to be a life-giving union?
jfsfrnd 5 hours ago
@jfsfrnd There is laws stopping faggots marrying though, annoying ey? U want to hurt us for denying you? Hehehe
AverageRidesAgain 3 hours ago
@all028 Well thats not naturaland is not what IVF was created to achieve, IVF has been hijackedby self interestedsick lesbo minorities. Gay men should NEVER be allowed to raise children EVER.
AverageRidesAgain 3 hours ago
@AverageRidesAgain IVF denial would be most likely handled by the states human rights act and has absolutely nothing to do with ssm. There was a case in CA not to long ago.
jfsfrnd 3 hours ago
@JJtheJaxartosaurus well, I wouldn't say it is prevalent unless you have supporting info that reveals the contrary
all028 7 hours ago
@zztstenglish Thanks. do you have more supporting info regarding A.I?
all028 7 hours ago
Civil marriage really has nothing to do with love. The State cannot regulate love, that’s both insane and impossible. Marriage is about procreation, which is in principle impossible between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman. When two men or two women can figure out how to procreate, this debate will become relevant.
TheConservativeGent 7 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent I get what you're saying, but what about heterosexual couples who can't conceive children? That wouldn't stop them from getting married though, so I don't know if it would even come down to that.
Cornelio101 7 hours ago
@Cornelio101 Correct, but one man and one woman can, on principle, procreate. The fact that in one instance the man and the woman cannot procreate does not damage the institution. This is where the true divide between Conservatives and Liberals arises. The Conservatives, whether they can articulate it or not, believe society benefits from heralding the life-giving union of one man and one woman; the family truly is the foundation of our society, and celebrating that union is essential.
TheConservativeGent 7 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent Why (and how) is your 'family' impacted by the removing of the gender requirements for this civil contract?
ElSeedyMinotaur 6 hours ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur Marriage highlights the sanctity of life and the importance of the natural family. If we abandon traditional marriage we admit that there is nothing unique or sacred about the union that creates life. Concurrently, we make the union of marriage less about children and more about the desires of two adults. Marriage should be, and always has been, about creating the best environment for children, which is naturally their mother and father.
TheConservativeGent 6 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent I don't know why you feel that YOUR interpretation of marriage is what marriage has 'always' been about... I fear you haven't really researched 'marriage' if you feel that is the case, friend.
ElSeedyMinotaur 4 hours ago 2
@ElSeedyMinotaur That’s a good deal to respond to. I’ll answer the comments that make sense. I don’t interpret anything, first of all. Go back to the beginning of Christian Rome, in the middle of the 4th Century A.D. Marriage was between one man and one woman. Our civilization has a distinct definition of marriage that is taken from the Sacrament of Matrimony. Understanding Matrimony is essential to understanding civil marriage, and that definition is one man, one woman for procreation.
TheConservativeGent 3 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent You believe that 'marriage' began in Christian Rome?
Nonsense.
I'm discussing the civil contract... you can decide to celebrate whatever you like in your home or your church. That impacts this civil contract not at all, sorry.
ElSeedyMinotaur 3 hours ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur No, that isn’t what I believe, nor did I claim that it did. I acknowledged that Western civilization draws its definition of marriage from the Christian faith. If you’re dealing exclusively with civil contracts, fine. Gays can have civil unions. If we’re discussing ‘marriage’, we need to acknowledge the traditional, social, and spiritual implications of the very word. Changing the definition is arbitrary and ignores the purpose of the word.
P.S. The sarcasm is awfully juvenile.
TheConservativeGent 3 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent 'Marriage' is a civil contract. That's what we're discussing. You told me to go back to the beginning of Christian Rome and look at the definition of marriage then... why?
At least TWO Roman Emperors married men... married them. You know, if we're talking 'traditions' that need to be 'acknowledged.'
Sarcasm? Perhaps I'm just answering the comments that 'make sense?' (wink)
ElSeedyMinotaur 2 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent How is your selection of 4th Century Christian Rome's definition of 'marriage' as THE marriage not arbitrary, friend?
ElSeedyMinotaur 2 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent Seedy is a fucktard, doesnt take long to work that out, hehehe.
AverageRidesAgain 1 hour ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur Before you jump the gun, this is NOT an issue with separation of establishing a state religion( (1st Amendment), it is an issue of understanding from whence we draw our definition. If you wish to rid civil marriage of religious influence, disregard the word itself. It’s an inherently theological term. Even with religious freedom, we as a society should still celebrate the unique life-giving union of one man and one woman, a.k.a. marriage.
TheConservativeGent 3 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent Maybe you would want arranged marriages between an adult male and a teen age girl?
jfsfrnd 3 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent The idea that 'marriage' is an inherently theological term is also laughable...
I suppose that when we speak of 'marrying' two metals that is, in fact, theological in nature? That when we say a wine 'marries' well with a cheese that we mean that they are literally joined spiritually and legally in a church?
Heh.
Sorry, the idea that language is immutable is about as laughable as your understanding of the word 'marriage.'
ElSeedyMinotaur 3 hours ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur What we want is for society to acknowledge that hetro is the norm and superior, thats all, we want our rights.
AverageRidesAgain 1 hour ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur Because it sends the message that homosexuality is OK and endorsed by society, when it isnt.
AverageRidesAgain 3 hours ago
@AverageRidesAgain Oh, Average.... you don't speak for society. Sorry. You can barely speak for yourself.
ElSeedyMinotaur 3 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent And the fact that same sex couples can't procreate with each other doesn't damage the institution either.
jfsfrnd 5 hours ago
@jfsfrnd Fact is SSM and homosexuality isSICK. End of story.
AverageRidesAgain 3 hours ago
@TheConservativeGent The states that are legalizing same sex marriage have to treat same sex couples who want children the same as any couple that can't have children. Good try.
jfsfrnd 5 hours ago
Comment removed
TheConservativeGent 7 hours ago
All Comments for this video: "I'M PISSED BECAUSE GAY MARRIAGE IS WRONG!" Get a life and stop watching Ellen if you hate gays so much.
Anameleth13 8 hours ago
@Punkin7714
Blacks were denied equality, we're bashed... Killed.
Gays have been denied equality, have been bashed and killed. Denied access to restaurants and venues.
What's the diff again?
Y2Krashman 9 hours ago 2
GAY marriage being legal its nothing like the segregation of black back then! No comparison. ...ppl are born black.. .not GAY.. .its a choice.... I agree with McCain on this one
PUNKIN7714 9 hours ago
@PUNKIN7714 So, please explain to me why homosexuality is so prevalent in other species, and I guess that I can vouch for myself in saying that I have never chosen or made a conscious decision that I was gay. I'm sorry that you can't understand that.
JJtheJaxartosaurus 8 hours ago
DOMA ruled unconstitutional today...
ElSeedyMinotaur 9 hours ago
DOMA ruled unconstitutional today...
ElSeedyMinotaur 9 hours ago
ellen is a filthy jew promoting the filthy jewish agenda
ticotico9000 11 hours ago
@ticotico9000 uh....lol what? yeah that makes total sense
Teira 10 hours ago
@karimmtorger - the other account u got is spelled karintorger with an N. What goes around comes around..BAHHAHAHA
zztstenglish 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish I did a mistake on the videos, but I learned from it. Mistakes happens, what's your excuse? BAHAHAHAHA
karimmtorger 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish Say, I'm still waiting google fairy on answers to my questions.
Since you claimed that I'm a liar. What did I lie about?
karimmtorger 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish Have you been totally been honest on this thread?
You're not a coward, are you? :)
karimmtorger 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish Another thing, at least I don't hide my account unlike you. Typical pussy.. lmao HAHAHAHA awww you're not a real man, you're just a whiny coward. It figures!
karimmtorger 16 hours ago
@karimmtorger - LOL! Karimtorger's account was initially cloaked until I called u out on it. Hypocrite! I only hid my channel cus I was constantly getting threats. be right back
zztstenglish 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish The reason why my account was cloaked was because I have uploaded videos. And to show them, I have to uncloaked it, genius.. LOL
You're stupid as they come. HAHAHA
karimmtorger 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish "cus I was constantly getting threats.. be right back"
LOL Aww, can't handle it.. you just proven not only are you a wuss, you're a coward. HAHAHAH pussy pussy
karimmtorger 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish You didn't called me out on it.. Try uploading a video with your account cloaked. No one can view it. Gee, stop putting your face up your ass, will ya please? HAHAHA
karimmtorger 15 hours ago
@zztstenglish - I'm convinced you no longer care about the validity of your position (giving you the benefit of the doubt that you 'ever' cared). If you had, you would not go on such rampant trails of redundancy...
aquatix 9 hours ago
@zztstenglish Stay away from foreign country affairs.. remember you claimed to be an American. ((chuckles)) Yeah sure you are. HAHAHAHA
karimmtorger 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish You're such a wuss.. a weak and unmanly one..
So what did I lie about again? LOL
I know you're a liar and I have proof. :)
karimmtorger 16 hours ago
@all028 - Marriage is MORE than just a contract as professor allen asserts.
zztstenglish 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish Professor Allen is an economist... why are we listening to him on contracts?
ElSeedyMinotaur 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish Professor Allen is a Canadian economist and ssm is legal in Canada.
jfsfrnd 16 hours ago
@all028 - Now see mercatornet: economic of same sex marriage: "An institution is a collection of expectations, norms & humanly devised constraints that work together towards some social objective"
zztstenglish 16 hours ago
@all028 - See Maynard v Hill("Other contracts may be modified, restricted, enlarged or entirely released upon the consent of the parties. Not so with marriage. The relation once formed, the law steps in and holds the parties to various obligations & liabilities. It is an institution..."
(part 1)
zztstenglish 16 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
oh man some of these homosexuals are pretty gross. It's one thing to want equal rights, but to re-define an institution that has stood for thousands of years simply for your own ego is pushing it pretty far.
CunningLinguist415 23 hours ago
Faggots aint natural, just accept it, we tolerate but we dont really accept, now to put more truth up over Karim's lies hehehehe
AverageRidesAgain 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur Rest Neo, the answers are comming...
ImperialGenKlenner 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Who? What? When? Where? What? Who? How? If? Where? When? &... Why? Repeat...
ImperialGenKlenner 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur I saw your friend Veru post something about the SCOTUS saying in 1959 something about Marriage being a fundamental right to mankind & essential to his survival. Guess thats a reason. Also, I can't find evidence of Polyamory being bad for children, unlike Polygamy. In case of tragedy, Polyamory allows children to still have 2 parents. I can still work, while the other cares for the children & provide emotional support. Things like that.
ImperialGenKlenner 1 day ago
@ImperialGenKlenner Yes, marriage is a fundamental human right according to many sources. Do you find evidence of it being good for children?
Where has it been studied?
This is a better tack, keep it up.
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur INCORRECT. Marriage isnt and has never been a human right, as children dont have it, human rights are that with which we are born, fucking fail cunt hahahahaha
AverageRidesAgain 1 day ago
@AverageRidesAgain Sorry, read the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, see Loving v. Virginia, etc, etc... oops.
Not too smart, wardawk. Sorry.
ElSeedyMinotaur 17 hours ago
@AverageRidesAgain No one said that marriage is is a human right. It has been declared a fundamental right for those people who are of the age of consent to marry. Get your facts straight.
jfsfrnd 16 hours ago
@ImperialGenKlenner - Yup, the Loving court wrote "Marriage is...fundamental to our very existence and survival"
Marriage wouldn't be 'fundamental' to our very 'existence' and 'survival' if it was de-linked from (or had nothing to do with) the reproductive potential.
zztstenglish 16 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zztstenglish '' if it was de-linked from (or had nothing to do with) the reproductive potential''
They have to legally treat same sex couples the same as infertile couples. Good try.
jfsfrnd 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish There are 3 supreme court cases that give couples the freedom to use contraceptives and limit their family size. Good try.
jfsfrnd 16 hours ago
@ImperialGenKlenner - And then the Loving court's subsequent actions CONFIRM what those quotes mean when they dismissed gay marriage in Baker v Nelson. The Loving was not talking about gay marriage when they declared it a right.
zztstenglish 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish Any state court dismissing same sex marriage only dismisses it for that state alone. Good try.
jfsfrnd 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish And the rulings in Lawrence v. Texas and Perry v. Schwarzenegger make clear that Baker must be re-examined.
Good point.
ElSeedyMinotaur 16 hours ago
We've learned how to use the vocal cords to vibrate the air passing through the throat and SPEAK.
Surely you wouldn't argue that speaking is 'unnatural,' would you?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur where did you come up with this notion that i think there can only be one purpose of each part of the human anatomy? use sense and remember any possible use isnt an intended one
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Who are you to decide what use people should make of their anatomy?
Are you going to tell people that speech is unnatural?
How?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Remember, this is not about winning or losing. This is about who got the skills in economics, sociology, philosophy, politics, finance... the resourses, the reaching power, the institutions, control of things, like Schools, the Internet, Hollywood & the media... When it comes to The Powers that Be playing Chess, every single move counts & domino effects are everywhere. The Chess pieces, are the children...
ImperialGenKlenner 1 day ago
@ImperialGenKlenner Where's that argument?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur After everything you just said to Burger King, do you still want me to provide an argument about why Poly has to be next, or have you finally realized everything single word that comes out of your mouth is that argument.
ImperialGenKlenner 1 day ago
@ImperialGenKlenner Yep, I want you to make an argument.
Why can't you?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger What about masturbating? Is that natural? Do YOU masturbate? Look, I understand your point about 'natural' but do you have anything else? Anything?
all028 1 day ago
@all028 contrary to what a lot of people say, masturbating is not natural. the purpose of your load is to make a baby...not to accidentally get on your computer keyboard or in your eye. im not saying i do no wrong. i havent judged any homos for humping dudes. ive just gave some facts and my personal opinion on homosexuality. i have no problem with any gay people. just dont ask me to endorse it.
no i dont have anything else. the whole topic of discussion is its against god and nature
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Except your knowledge of the Bible was not exactly encyclopedic, was it?
Why would we listen to your interpretation of what is 'natural?'
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur disregarding religion, the natural purpose of mating is obviously reproduction. its not an interpretation of any kind. if youd use your common sense youd see that. you cant win lol
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger My common sense?
I've used it.. that's how I know you're not making any sense.
A 'natural' use of genitals is the excretion of waste... do you agree?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur yeah i agree that your penis is for pissing. so?
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Would you argue that any other use is 'unnatural?'
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur uh no. have you forgotten that your nutsack is attached to your peehole as well as your bladder? its the only natural way to pee as well as the only natural way to reproduce.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Ah, so things can have many 'natural' uses/functions?
Good point! You're starting to get it!
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger - See singer v hara: Marriage is "for the purpose of encouraging the propagation of the [human] race"
zztstenglish 16 hours ago
@zztstenglish Then why did three separate court cases give citizens the freedom to use contraceptives?
jfsfrnd 16 hours ago
@didickcheeseburger - I'm not overgeneralizing; it would appear you are over simplifying sexual nature. And only natural process? Bullocks!
aquatix 1 day ago
@aquatix be careful with your wording. im strictly speaking about the natural purpose of sexual intercourse. just because people do it for fun doesnt mean its the intended purpose as nature dictates
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Well, it is a proven stress reliever and strengthens relationships... it seems to have many 'natural' purposes... just like your penis.
Hmm...
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Seems nature is far more complex and interesting than you give it credit for...
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur youre very vague with such comments. if you think theres some natural purpose for sex other than reproducing how bout an example.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger I gave you two.. it reduces anxiety and increases bonding between the participants.
Try reading a little deeper into the comments, friend.
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur so the semen shoots out into the woman to make them feel closer? lol. the things you describe, if true, are called byproducts. not the end result that nature intends.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger How do you know what nature 'intends?'
You speak to nature?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur Look and u will see the way, fagism is sick.
AverageRidesAgain 1 day ago
@AverageRidesAgain Illiteracy isn't much better.
But you know what? Mark Twain taught me something that I will use in this little retort. :)
If you know what I'm talking about, then you are not. If not, well then either way, this is a dead end nonentheless
kitsunefire1 18 hours ago
@didickcheeseburger Here's a further example of nature's complexity... you admit that your throat is there to pass food and air, correct?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger - It seems rather the opposite, sir. Do you understand what the term 'natural' means? Natural does not infer what one 'ought' to do with their sexuality. It simply implies that which can be found in nature.
Now, you could say natural is that which is 'usually' found in nature but that still does not imply that is something one 'ought' to do or conform to...
aquatix 21 hours ago
@ImperialGenKlenner *sigh* Do you have anything new to say? I think you've been repeating your mantra relentlessly for some time now
all028 1 day ago
Comment removed
MrBelacNitram 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger I think Poly Marriage should be legal.
ImperialGenKlenner 1 day ago
@ImperialGenKlenner marriage shouldnt even be a matter of legality. its personal and should be the sole decision of all parties affected.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
if he is for love, then he should NOT be against gay marriage. Love is love no matter who it is and if you want to marry someone of the same gender, you should have the right to. A black person can marry a white person and that used to be wrong
bandgeekatheart1992 1 day ago
I'm wearing cotton. Oops. I guess I'm going to hell. Shame on me (sarcasm)
all028 1 day ago
@all028 I don't think you are... didick may have another opinion. Apparently, he's very concerned with the parts of the Bible that he thinks promote bigotry. When he reads it.
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@zztstenglish very interesting about Doctor Geronimo. are you also aware Nasa has a space probe headed to Mars called Curious. Should arrive in about 6-7 months. Fascinating stuff!
all028 1 day ago
gay marriage is a sin .being gay is wrong and unnatural. god intended men and women to be together and that is the way he made us wired. i pray to god that this abomination of gay marriage ends.being gay ruins the morals of our society.being gay has brought so much disease to this world.
twittytumbles 1 day ago
@twittytumbles And I pray that you will understand that the founding fathers created a country of religious freedom and didn't want one religion to rule the nation. Please read An Act for Establishing Religious Freedom by Thomas Jefferson. It's online for free.
Being gay doesn't create any disease. Being promiscuous can and that applies to everyone gay straight bi and those who don't indentify with an orientation. Educate yourself.
jfsfrnd 1 day ago
@twittytumbles Sorry, but there are no bible verses that says gay marriage is a sin. Also being is not wrong or is it unnatural. Have Jesus ever met a gay or lesbian person? No! Did God mentioned in the bible that gays are wrong and unnatural? No! If you are referring to Leviticus or Romans Chapters, then you are biblical illiterate. I can debunk your false teachings and show that you're not a true Christian. All you're doing is slandering people, that is a sin. Duh!
karimmtorger 1 day ago
@karimmtorger "thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination". it looks pretty clear to me. this cant be "debunked"
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger "thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind; it is an abomination". it looks pretty clear to me. this can't be "debunked""
Oh yes it can be debunked because it's translated incorrectly. Aww. you really are biblical illiterate.
karimmtorger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Do you also consider shellfish an abomination? How about shaving? You're against that, right?
Wearing cotton blends?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger You do realize you are reading a translation maybe spanning several translations of a 5000 + year old text? Besides our country and our laws are not based on the Bible.
jfsfrnd 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger How do you equate that passage with don't allow two men to engage in an adult, consensual, monogamous marriage in the year 2012 in the United States of America?
jfsfrnd 1 day ago
@jfsfrnd you know the phrase "do i have to spell it out?" my last bible quote clearly forbids sexual relations between man and man. also anywhere marriage is referenced in the bible it is always between a man and a woman.
youre playing the childs game of "technicalities". like when mom says dont touch the cookie jar so you reach in without touching the jar. its obvious that the bible prohibits that kind of relationship between people of the same sex.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger So you don't eat shellfish or shave, right?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur OMG we forgot to outlaw shellfish and shaving. What were we thinking?
jfsfrnd 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur actually i do both. where in the bible does it say i cant?
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger So you managed to find the ''gay part'' of the Bible but ignored the other passages?
jfsfrnd 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Leviticus 11:9-12, Leviticus 19:27... I thought you'd read the Bible?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur ive read parts of the bible based on issues i wonder about. its never really been a big concern of mine to randomly see if its ok to eat clams and crabs lol
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Oh, generally I try to read all of something and understand it in context.
You should give that a try.
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Do you wear cotton blends?
Hint: That's forbidden in Leviticus, too...
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur cotton blends? lol. i guess ill let my beard grow. i wont eat shellfish and ill start wearing polyester. you gonna quit being a homo?
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger I'm not homosexual.
Do you always make false assumptions about people and the Bible?
Or just today?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur its not a false assumption that homosexuality is unnatural. man and woman can bear fruit while man and man bear no fruit. its common sense.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger So you feel that any barren couple is 'unnatural?'
Who are you to make those kind of statements, friend?
You don't even bother to read things unless you think they agree with you
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur no because man and womans intent is still to reproduce together even if one or the other is defective. it doesnt make their relationship unnatural just because they dont function properly. now man and man on the other hand are not made to naturally reproduce in the first place. this defines their relationship as unnatural.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger I wonder why you feel you get to decide what other people's 'intent' should be?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur its not even a matter of me "deciding". reproducing is what sexual activity exists for. youre mistaking a desirable byproduct as the purpose.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Again, why do you get to decide what 'sexual activity' 'exists for?'
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur im not personally deciding. if the purpose of sex wasnt to reproduce then wed be extinct. its nature to ensure the survival of a species by reproducing. dont be ridiculous.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Not all sexual activity results in pregnancy,.. surely even you have learned this?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur this is true but a failed attempt or the fact that people do it for fun doesnt suddenly change the purpose it exists for
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger So, as I said, your genitals 'exist' primarily to excrete waste... does this make all sex 'unnatural' in your strange world?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Or is the world considerably more complex and nuanced than the idiocy your comfort level allows you to accept? (see your Leviticus 'knowledge' for an example)
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger 7 billion people and a kid starving to death every 4 seconds - maybe SS marriage at this time is part of the solution ?
trevortrevortsr2 1 day ago
@trevortrevortsr2 im not sure of your point. are you suggesting same sex marriage as population control? i dont think whether or not homos get married is going to affect whether they reproduce or not. if theyre gay then theyre not reproducing anyway. the possibility of marriage will have no bearing on such an issue
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Yes, Marriage and reproduction are not linked.
Good point.
I agree.
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger - Do you assert that which has a 'seemingly' primary purpose can not possibly have any other equally 'valid' purpose?
aquatix 1 day ago
@aquatix It would seem that the 'primary' purpose of genitalia is the expulsion of waste... (you certainly use them that way long before you can even begin to have sex)
Hmm...
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur - Hmm, interesting observation.
aquatix 1 day ago
@aquatix dont try to generalize what im saying. im speaking strictly about the natural purpose of sex. there is no equally valid purpose for sex. people may use sex for any purpose they choose but ultimately the acts ONLY natural purpose is reproduction. PERIOD.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Again, what bearing does your concept of 'natural' sex have on this discussion of civil marriage? I see none.
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur you can look back into my earlier comments for that. this conversation has went way off course. that being said just consider that i reply to what people say to me
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger ?
What 'earlier comments' are those?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger I agree... you're way off course on this issue.
Big of you to admit that.
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur youre awesome. thats clearly not what i meant at all. have you gotten so desperate that you resort to intentionally misquoting me? a valiant effort lol
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger When did I quote you at all, friend?
I took part of what you said out of context and I used it to support my position... just like YOU did with Leviticus.
Oops.
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur yeah its out of context. when god says NOT to lay with men as with women it might actually mean he wants you to lay with men. lol. theres nothing to interpret. the verse is clear.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger He's clear about shellfish in Leviticus... you don't seem to be arguing for the outlawing of Red Lobster.
How about divorce? Jesus was clear on that score... outlawed?
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur if you look at past comments for this video, outlawing same sex marriage was never my point. i still maintain its wrong and unnatural but i feel it should be a freedom of choice.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Well, I certainly support your first amendment right to be wrong about life, nature and the Bible.
Good on ya, son!
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger Some Biblical scholars take that verse to mean not to be bisexual because there is no point to tell a homosexual not to lay with men like he does with a woman.
jfsfrnd 1 day ago
@jfsfrnd Many more would point out that many of the tribal rules have little application outside of a historical curiosity.
ElSeedyMinotaur 1 day ago
@ElSeedyMinotaur Agreed. :)
jfsfrnd 1 day ago
@jfsfrnd that sounds like a gay persons attempt to twist the bible to suit his desires. and a weak one at that. the verse is clear and the message is obvious.
didickcheeseburger 1 day ago
@didickcheeseburger That's your problem. Your book has nothing to do with our laws. That is the important point.
jfsfrnd 1 day ago