Gingrich To Gay Man: Vote For Obama

B_Jingoist

Just Browsing
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Posts
354
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
101
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
If you passed any Logic course it must be because you were home schooled:rolleyes:.
For the law to be equal it would state that ANY TWO CONSENTING ADULTS COULD MARRY. If they are heterosexual and choose to marry someone of the same sex they could. By stating that only men could marry women it discriminates against the homosexual community so the current law is not equal because only one group is negatively affected by it.

You just aren't quite getting it.

Or you just don't know what the definition of equal is. The law right now states that no one can marry someone of the same sex. That is equal. No one. It doesn't matter who or what you like to have sex with. It doesn't matter who you love. It doesn't matter your race, or if you are male or female. The law applies equally to all.

I am straight. I cannot marry someone of the same sex. You are gay. You cannot marry someone of the same sex. Now tell me again, how the law is not equally applied to both of us?
 

houtx48

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Posts
6,900
Media
0
Likes
308
Points
208
Gender
Male
You just aren't quite getting it.

Or you just don't know what the definition of equal is. The law right now states that no one can marry someone of the same sex. That is equal. No one. It doesn't matter who or what you like to have sex with. It doesn't matter who you love. It doesn't matter your race, or if you are male or female. The law applies equally to all.

I am straight. I cannot marry someone of the same sex. You are gay. You cannot marry someone of the same sex. Now tell me again, how the law is not equally applied to both of us?
Are you some kind of homophobe or just being contrary?
 

cruztbone

Experimental Member
Joined
May 22, 2004
Posts
1,284
Media
0
Likes
11
Points
258
Age
70
Location
Capitola CA USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I am proud to support obama. I am proud he is my president. Obama has more character, more class, more intellect and more ability than newt or any gop candidate, by a huge margin. That should be obvious to any one with a working brain by now.
Proudly gay. Proudly latino. Proud to support obama in 2012.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,237
Media
213
Likes
31,758
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Don't agree with a gay person? Must be a homophobe......facts people...use them.
No, I think people may be calling you a homophobe because it's clear from your posting that you don't think gay people should be allowed to get married. They're just using LOGIC.
 

B_Jingoist

Just Browsing
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Posts
354
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
101
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
No, I think people may be calling you a homophobe because it's clear from your posting that you don't think gay people should be allowed to get married. They're just using LOGIC.

If it's clear, well then you need to go back to school and relearn the English language.
 

StormfrontFL

Superior Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Posts
8,903
Media
4
Likes
6,851
Points
358
Location
United States
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
You just aren't quite getting it.

Or you just don't know what the definition of equal is. The law right now states that no one can marry someone of the same sex. That is equal. No one. It doesn't matter who or what you like to have sex with. It doesn't matter who you love. It doesn't matter your race, or if you are male or female. The law applies equally to all.

I am straight. I cannot marry someone of the same sex. You are gay. You cannot marry someone of the same sex. Now tell me again, how the law is not equally applied to both of us?
Okay moron, here we go once again. Discrimination is written into the existing law. One group is told that their relationship is the only valid type. For the law to be nondiscriminatory it would state that ANY TWO CONSENTING ADULTS COULD BE MARRIED so that weould be man/woman, man/man, or woman/woman...equal and fair to hetero and homosexuals. Your failure to admit that the existing law is discriminatory clearly shows that you are a homophobe, your other posts show you to be racist. Just curious, do you also deny the Holocaust?


 

B_Nick8

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Posts
11,403
Media
0
Likes
298
Points
208
Location
New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
Sexuality
80% Gay, 20% Straight
Gender
Male
Okay moron, here we go once again. Discrimination is written into the existing law. One group is told that their relationship is the only valid type. For the law to be nondiscriminatory it would state that ANY TWO CONSENTING ADULTS COULD BE MARRIED so that weould be man/woman, man/man, or woman/woman...equal and fair to hetero and homosexuals. Your failure to admit that the existing law is discriminatory clearly shows that you are a homophobe, your other posts show you to be racist. Just curious, do you also deny the Holocaust?

You ought to give it up, Stormfront. And I mean that in the nicest way. Arguing with Jingoist is like trying to have a conversation with a box of hair. He confuses "logic" with intellectual and emotional intelligence, kind of like Spock. Only without the intelligence. And kind of like this:



Except for one HUGE thing. The law is equal. No man can marry another man and no woman can marry another woman. No one, regardless of sexual preference, can marry someone of the same sex.

It has nothing to do with equality. It has nothing to do with equal rights. It would be a completely new right, that all people could enjoy. It would be unconstitutional to have a law that says you have to be homosexual to marry someone of the same sex.

And one cool thing about discrimination. Who you have sex with, is in fact a choice (Well it is 50% your choice the other person has to be a consenting individual as well) and if someone doesn't like that, they are well within their rights.

I can think of 20 or 73 people I know who would love to parse the many "logics" in those paragraphs.

Frankly, I could underline, italicize and bold it all in alternating patterns but it's all too absurd to be believed.
 

B_Jingoist

Just Browsing
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Posts
354
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
101
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Okay moron, here we go once again. Discrimination is written into the existing law. One group is told that their relationship is the only valid type. For the law to be nondiscriminatory it would state that ANY TWO CONSENTING ADULTS COULD BE MARRIED so that weould be man/woman, man/man, or woman/woman...equal and fair to hetero and homosexuals. Your failure to admit that the existing law is discriminatory clearly shows that you are a homophobe, your other posts show you to be racist. Just curious, do you also deny the Holocaust?



I really didn't want to have to break out a dictionary on this one, but I'm going to give it one more chance.

The law isn't discriminatory. The law doesn't care who you love. It doesn't care who you have sex with or how you feel about another person.

All it says is that to for two people to participate in a marriage contract they must be of the opposite sex. Which is completely non-discriminatory since it applies to everyone in the same way.

It doesn't say the two participants must love each other, it doesn't say they have to have sex, it doesn't say they even have to be heterosexual.

A homosexual man can get married to a woman. Just like a straight man can get married to a woman. A gay man cannot get married to another man. Just like a straight man cannot get married to another man. Neither straight nor homosexual men can get married to another man. The law is applied equally to both parties.

This is basic legal doctrine and it is the reason gay advocates are failing horribly at attaining their goal. It has nothing to do with gay rights, it has nothing to do with equal rights, and equating any of it to women's suffrage of black civil rights is absolutely outrageous.

If they were to change marriage, it would be a completely new right that ALL people can utilize, regardless of sexual preference. THAT is why the government hasn't been forced to change. Because for one, they are under no obligation to recognize ANY marriage. The government could tomorrow say all marriages are null and void we no longer recognize it as a legal agreement. That is perfectly legal and acceptable to do. If you want power of attorney or all other legal obligations that traditionally come with marriage, hire a lawyer and draft the paperwork.

That is why defining what marriage can be between is perfectly Constitutional because they are under no obligation to legally recognize ANY marriage.

Your argument is purely emotional and has no basis in law or fact.
 

B_Jingoist

Just Browsing
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Posts
354
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
101
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I can think of 20 or 73 people I know who would love to parse the many "logics" in those paragraphs.

Frankly, I could underline, italicize and bold it all in alternating patterns but it's all too absurd to be believed.

You have failed to prove a point.
 

StormfrontFL

Superior Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Posts
8,903
Media
4
Likes
6,851
Points
358
Location
United States
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Nick, I realized that Jingo is not someone who I want to waste time on. He is just trying to stir things up, a classic troll. Judging from the majority of his posts on the site he has a real problem with gays being treated as equals so given time he will go too far and will be banned. Let's start the countdown
 

B_Jingoist

Just Browsing
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Posts
354
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
101
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Nick, I realized that Jingo is not someone who I want to waste time on. He is just trying to stir things up, a classic troll. Judging from the majority of his posts on the site he has a real problem with gays being treated as equals so given time he will go too far and will be banned. Let's start the countdown

Congratulations and not being capable of debate.

Typical of today's America. No one is capable of leading an argument with logic and fact instead they thrive on emotion and instant gratification. And if they aren't able to that the other person MUST be a racist homophobe because there is no way I'm wrong!

You are a child.
 

StormfrontFL

Superior Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Posts
8,903
Media
4
Likes
6,851
Points
358
Location
United States
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Congratulations and not being capable of debate.

Typical of today's America. No one is capable of leading an argument with logic and fact instead they thrive on emotion and instant gratification. And if they aren't able to that the other person MUST be a racist homophobe because there is no way I'm wrong!

You are a child.
This will be my last reply to you because it is clear that you are incapable of rational thought and will never admit when you are wrong. Anyone with a functioning brain can see that the current law is discriminatory. It only acknowledges heterosexual relationships and tells homosexuals that they can enter hetero relationships. It gives validity to the hetero and marginalizes the homo. If the law were gender neutral it would then treat all Americans who wish to wed as equal.
I realize that you feel that as long as you try to come across as analytical you won't come across as racist or homophobic but the fact that you refuse to acknowledge clear examples of the existing bias reveal what you really are.
I'm not going to waste any more time on you because your kind is a sad, pathetic, empty, hateful excuse for a human being.

....the countdown to your banning continues
 

B_Jingoist

Just Browsing
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Posts
354
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
101
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
This will be my last reply to you because it is clear that you are incapable of rational thought and will never admit when you are wrong. Anyone with a functioning brain can see that the current law is discriminatory. It only acknowledges heterosexual relationships and tells homosexuals that they can enter hetero relationships. It gives validity to the hetero and marginalizes the homo. If the law were gender neutral it would then treat all Americans who wish to wed as equal.
I realize that you feel that as long as you try to come across as analytical you won't come across as racist or homophobic but the fact that you refuse to acknowledge clear examples of the existing bias reveal what you really are.
I'm not going to waste any more time on you because your kind is a sad, pathetic, empty, hateful excuse for a human being.

....the countdown to your banning continues

You are clearly an idiot. That isn't an ad hominem attack. Just merely stating a fact.

This is BASIC law. BASIC. 100 level community college basic.

The laws as they stand don't allow anyone to do something that someone else can't do.

How the hell do you not understand?

It allows straight men to marry women. It allows gay men to marry women. It doesn't allow straight men to marry men. It doesn't allow gay men to marry men. How in the FUCK do you not see that as equal?

A straight man can do more and no less than a gay man. That is the EXACT definition of equal.

AND the reason it is constitutional is because the government doesn't have to recognize any marriage. Do you not understand that? The government can say the concept of marriage doesn't exist under the law PERIOD. And because they are under no obligation what so fucking ever to recognize the existence of anything called marriage, they have the ability to define it as they see fit.

It is a similar situation of a seminary student that was awarded a college scholarship from the Federal government. He wanted to use it to go to a religious college. The government said it cannot be used at a religious school and it can only be used for certain degrees. The student took it to court stating that the government was violating his first amendment rights. You know what the courts said? The Federal government doesn't have to give you a single DIME. You have no right to this money. You are not entitled to this money and because of that the government can tell you how it can be used because they don't even have to give it you.

That is the same concept here that your small mind is unable to understand. The government can't stop a religious marriage, but when it comes to the recognition for tax or legal reasons. They can tell you to fuck off.

You are uneducated and you are ignorant of our legal system. Get a fucking clue and read a damn book.
 

B_Jingoist

Just Browsing
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Posts
354
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
101
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Oh, and the fact that none of you are able to identify the difference between outcome and reasoning is amazing.

There is nothing in my posts saying I disagree with same-sex marriages. I am merely saying your reasoning for allowing them is wrong.

The government should have no say whatsoever in marriages. They are a religious ceremony and that is all. Married couples should receive no benefits from the government. at all, unless they have children.

If couples want legal protections as a couple, they should hire a lawyer and draft the paperwork. The Government should void all marriage licences and they have no business issuing them.

That is why you are an idiot. Your emotions cloud facts you judgmental prick.
 
Last edited:

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,237
Media
213
Likes
31,758
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Oh, and the fact that none of you are able to identify the difference between outcome and reasoning is amazing.

There is nothing in my posts saying I disagree with same-sex marriages. I am merely saying your reasoning for allowing them is wrong.

The government should have no say whatsoever in marriages. They are a religious ceremony and that is all. Married couples should receive no benefits from the government. at all, unless they have children.

If couples want legal protections as a couple, they should hire a lawyer and draft the paperwork. The Government should void all marriage licences and they have no business issuing them.

That is why you are an idiot. Your emotions cloud facts you judgmental prick.
You're funny.....
 

TurkeyWithaSunburn

Legendary Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Posts
3,589
Media
25
Likes
1,225
Points
608
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Congratulations and not being capable of debate.

Typical of today's America. No one is capable of leading an argument with logic and fact instead they thrive on emotion and instant gratification. And if they aren't able to that the other person MUST be a racist homophobe because there is no way I'm wrong!

You are a child.

Oh, and the fact that none of you are able to identify the difference between outcome and reasoning is amazing.

There is nothing in my posts saying I disagree with same-sex marriages. I am merely saying your reasoning for allowing them is wrong.

The government should have no say whatsoever in marriages. They are a religious ceremony and that is all. Married couples should receive no benefits from the government. at all, unless they have children.

If couples want legal protections as a couple, they should hire a lawyer and draft the paperwork. The Government should void all marriage licences and they have no business issuing them.

That is why you are an idiot. Your emotions cloud facts you judgmental prick.
And name calling is a reasonable non-emotional form of debate?