Not supporting same sex marriage does NOT make someone a bigot.

[QUOTE="whiskeystrike"][QUOTE="whiskeystrike"]

To get away from the insults and bush beating let's have a simple question.

Please explain as to why you think gays should not have the same government recognized marriage as any straight couple.

Please do not

• include religious reasoning (seperation of church and state)
• say you just don't like it

GOGOGOGURT

Yep. The g*y couple could adopt kids. And the kid would be raised in a biased household. The kid will abviously be g*y, and it could be very confusing and traumatizing for the child.

ummmmm, almost all gay kids have been raised by straight parents and you have absolutely nothing backing that statement up.Rich3232

You seemed to have taken the words right out of my mind...

Do you have any statistics proving that "almost all gay kids have been raised by straight parents"?

[QUOTE="Rich3232"] ummmmm, almost all gay kids have been raised by straight parents and you have absolutely nothing backing that statement up.Nibroc420

You seemed to have taken the words right out of my mind...

Do you have any statistics proving that "almost all gay kids have been raised by straight parents"?

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

[QUOTE="Rich3232"] ummmmm, almost all gay kids have been raised by straight parents and you have absolutely nothing backing that statement up.Rich3232

You seemed to have taken the words right out of my mind...

Do you have any statistics proving that "almost all gay kids have been raised by straight parents"?

[QUOTE="whiskeystrike"]

To get away from the insults and bush beating let's have a simple question.

Please explain as to why you think gays should not have the same government recognized marriage as any straight couple.

Please do not

• include religious reasoning (seperation of church and state)
• say you just don't like it

whiskeystrike

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]And how would it be traumatizing?Nibroc420

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

[QUOTE="whiskeystrike"] Any takers? toast_burner

Yep. The g*y couple could adopt kids. And the kid would be raised in a biased household. The kid will abviously be g*y, and it could be very confusing and traumatizing for the child.

A child without a mother. I shouldn't have to spell it out for you. It's just not healthy.

[QUOTE="Rich3232"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

You seemed to have taken the words right out of my mind...

Do you have any statistics proving that "almost all gay kids have been raised by straight parents"?

Nibroc420

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

Yep. The g*y couple could adopt kids. And the kid would be raised in a biased household. The kid will abviously be g*y, and it could be very confusing and traumatizing for the child.

GOGOGOGURT

A child without a mother. I shouldn't have to spell it out for you. It's just not healthy.

[QUOTE="Rich3232"] ummmmm, almost all gay kids have been raised by straight parents and you have absolutely nothing backing that statement up.Nibroc420

You seemed to have taken the words right out of my mind...

Do you have any statistics proving that "almost all gay kids have been raised by straight parents"?

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

Yep. The g*y couple could adopt kids. And the kid would be raised in a biased household. The kid will abviously be g*y, and it could be very confusing and traumatizing for the child.

GOGOGOGURT

A child without a mother. I shouldn't have to spell it out for you. It's just not healthy.

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

Yep. The g*y couple could adopt kids. And the kid would be raised in a biased household. The kid will abviously be g*y, and it could be very confusing and traumatizing for the child.

GOGOGOGURT

A child without a mother. I shouldn't have to spell it out for you. It's just not healthy.

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Even though there is evidence to show that's not true? Even if kids were more likely to be gay why is that a problem? And how would it be traumatizing?

toast_burner

A child without a mother. I shouldn't have to spell it out for you. It's just not healthy.

States do not allow assisting injury of another person purposefully DerveCreaves

they mostly do.

what legal elements are in place, in a state you know, that prevents a consensual injury of an adult?

(especially if it's unintended like pain from virgin womens first time or etc. those are intended.)DerveCreaves

what

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]And how would it be traumatizing?toast_burner

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]Even though there is evidence to show that's not true? Even if kids were more likely to be gay why is that a problem? And how would it be traumatizing?

MrPraline

A child without a mother. I shouldn't have to spell it out for you. It's just not healthy.

Forget it you know what I'm talking about.

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] I suggest you check the link i posted.Nibroc420

you know what I'm talking about.GOGOGOGURT

[QUOTE="MrPraline"][QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

A child without a mother. I shouldn't have to spell it out for you. It's just not healthy.

GOGOGOGURT

Forget it you know what I'm talking about.

[QUOTE="MrPraline"][QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

A child without a mother. I shouldn't have to spell it out for you. It's just not healthy.

GOGOGOGURT

Forget it you know what I'm talking about.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]Yep because dads are scum who don't care about children. Thats why only lesbians shoiuld be allowed kids.

toast_burner

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] You didn't even watch it.Nibroc420

Nibroc, what do you have to say about your quote from the other thread? Or the other couple of things you posted in that threaddave123321

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] You didn't even watch it.Nibroc420

[QUOTE="MrPraline"][QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

A child without a mother. I shouldn't have to spell it out for you. It's just not healthy.

GOGOGOGURT

Forget it you know what I'm talking about.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]I've seen it before. Two kids fall down, one is picked up by his mum but the child of the gay couple is left there as his fathers stand over him uncaring. I hope the video is a joke.

toast_burner

[QUOTE="dave123321"]Nibroc, what do you have to say about your quote from the other thread? Or the other couple of things you posted in that threadNibroc420

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

[QUOTE="MrPraline"] Plenty of children are raised by a (straight) single father. Is that wrong too?ShadowsDemon

Forget it you know what I'm talking about.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="dave123321"]Nibroc, what do you have to say about your quote from the other thread? Or the other couple of things you posted in that threaddave123321

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]Why should anal sex be illegal?

toast_burner

Nibroc, what do you have to say about your quote from the other thread? Or the other couple of things you posted in that threaddave123321

He's just trolling in this thread and in ShadowMoses and ShadowDemon's desperation to have allies in this thread, they agree with most of the thing he says, not realizing that they are being trolled. :lol:

Anyway, to me this thread is pretty much just anti-gay marriage folks not having an argument to support their beliefs and then crying about how people are being close-minded and mean to them.

[QUOTE="DerveCreaves"]States do not allow assisting injury of another person purposefully pie-junior

they mostly do.

what legal elements are in place, in a state you know, that prevents a consensual injury of an adult?

(especially if it's unintended like pain from virgin womens first time or etc. those are intended.)DerveCreaves

what

Doesn't stop purposeful unintended damage, and some disease can spread through the condemDerveCreaves

Can you explain how unintended damage, can be purposeful?

No they don't. It's just hard to prove. States do not allow assisted injuries or assisted suicides. Also self-harm or consensual harm to eachother is very odd and questions mental stability.DerveCreaves

I don't feel like going through the the legal doctrines that allow defences to the perpertrator of harm with acceptance of risks and/or shared liability for self-damage. I will (instead) give you one example, in the form of competitive fighting, and I want you to explain how it coincides with your legal analysis of the world.

[QUOTE="dave123321"]Nibroc, what do you have to say about your quote from the other thread? Or the other couple of things you posted in that threadGreySeal9

He's just trolling in this thread and in ShadowMoses and ShadowDemon's desperation to have allies in this thread, they agree with most of the thing he says, not realizing that they are being trolled. :lol:

Anyway, to me this thread is pretty much just anti-gay marriage folks not having an argument to support their beliefs and then crying about how people are being close-minded and mean to them.

[QUOTE="DerveCreaves"] No they don't. It's just hard to prove. States do not allow assisted injuries or assisted suicides. Also self-harm or consensual harm to eachother is very odd and questions mental stability.pie-junior

I don't feel like going through the the legal doctrines that allow defences to the perpertrator of harm with acceptance of risks and/or shared liability for self-damage. I will (instead) give you one example, in the form of competitive fighting, and I want you to explain how it coincides with your legal analysis of the world.

[QUOTE="DerveCreaves"]Doesn't stop purposeful unintended damage, and some disease can spread through the condemNibroc420

Can you explain how unintended damage, can be purposeful?

[QUOTE="pie-junior"]

[QUOTE="DerveCreaves"] No they don't. It's just hard to prove. States do not allow assisted injuries or assisted suicides. Also self-harm or consensual harm to eachother is very odd and questions mental stability.DerveCreaves

I don't feel like going through the the legal doctrines that allow defences to the perpertrator of harm with acceptance of risks and/or shared liability for self-damage. I will (instead) give you one example, in the form of competitive fighting, and I want you to explain how it coincides with your legal analysis of the world.

competitive fighting is different how?

against the law in what way?

what offences have they committed and/or what civil torts are they liable for (relating to each other), aside from obvious ones relating to public interests in public order and safety?

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

[QUOTE="DerveCreaves"]Doesn't stop purposeful unintended damage, and some disease can spread through the condemDerveCreaves

Can you explain how unintended damage, can be purposeful?

I will give a similar example, that may suit this discussion better.

sports- be it amateur or professional- do not (normally) allow for liability against a player for physical damage done to another player.

[QUOTE="DerveCreaves"][QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

Can you explain how unintended damage, can be purposeful?

Nibroc420

It contributes to the spread of disease.Nibroc420

Heterosexual activity also spreads disease, you dolt.

I will give a similar example, that may suit this discussion better.

sports- be it amateur or professional- do not (normally) allow for liability against a player for physical damage done to another player.

pie-junior

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] It contributes to the spread of disease.br0kenrabbit

Heterosexual activity also spreads disease, you dolt.