Gurk_MacGuintey said:
I have answered the questions - both of them. You either lack the cognitive ability to comprehend the answers, or you're just stupid. Take your pick. Anyone who thinks redefining Marriage to include the deviant-sex-based relationships of perverts will not affect our culture on a most basic level is deluded.
No you haven't, you've blathered. And ranted. And then went and hid for two days while you cribbed notes from TBN for this reply.
This is called an "assertion". You don't know what effect such a paradigm shift will have on the culture any more than I do. You only "think" it will have no effect, while I "think" it will.
My assertion is based on factual historical evidence of similar instances such as the advent of cross-caste marriage, black marriage, interfaith marriage, and interracial marriage. While all of these addendums did and still do have their critics, none of them has successfully destroyed the fabric of society in any fashion.
Yours is based on theological bullshit brainwashing.
You've been reading Queer fantasy, not history. Certainly pederasty did exist in classical cultures - but young boys getting cvornholed by older men was hardly a universal feature of either civilization.
What's funny is that of the two of us, YOURS are the posts that have a single-minded focus on the SEX part of the homosexual relationship. Overcompensating for something? You're really obsessed here. And you put the lie to your earlier statement that "You don't give a shit what they do." I think you care very much what they do, so much that it wakes you up at night. Sweating.
This is leftist claptrap. Same-sex marriage never existed as a cultural institution anywhere, anytime, ever in any culture, civilization or era until some vile leftist homo bug decided it would be a good way to assault one of those fundamental pillars your hero Marx talked about. You even threw in the standard christophobic hatred of christianity by implying that Jesus sucked dick.
Who quoted Marx? I believe that was you, Mein Scheizkopf. As for the Son of Our Lord, I only said he was an "avowed bachelor" and added it was probably perfectly normal for a healthy male Jew in those days to reach the age of thirty without having any discernable sex drive for females and who spent all his free time with a group of hairy, unwashed men down by the stables and in special "praying gardens". You added the blasphemy about him committing sodomy, and for that you're going to Hell.
By elevating the degenerate lust affairs of homosexual perverts to the same level as good and wholesome marriages, you are, in effect, endorsing deviancy.
You know what's funny? All your examples of degenerate homosexual behavior are of MALE homosexuals. So are your most graphic depictions of the sex acts involved in being a fag. Your head is in a very strange place, Gurk. But I'm sure you've heard that line before....
There is not one single iota of definitive scientific proof that being a homosexual is anything other than learned behavior. To imply that there are "gay kids" who drop out and off themselves because the mean 'homophobes' pick on them is to assert that being a dirty gay pig is an inherent behavioral trait. It is not and you cannot prove that it is. That homosexuals commit suicide at far greater rates than normal people is simply proof that homosexuality is a debilitating mental illness.
So it's okay to pick on and beat up gays because they act different? Please don't breed, Gurk.
Everyone's thoughts are the synthesis of what they believe. You are simply trying to separate faggot activism from it's clear and obvious rooting in marxist dialectic - and it's not even a clever attempt.
That fact is that homosexuals are perverts, do not belong on an equal footing in mainstream society and will always be marginalized circus freaks whose entire lives and beings revolve around the deviant sexual behaviors that define them as homosexuals. Homosexualks belong in the closets, back alleys and gitters where perversion belongs.
I'm pretty sure we're all getting a REALLY good look at the synthesis of your thoughts, here. I got you so worked up you forgot how to spellcheck. It's all the gay sex imagery, ain't it? You wanna stop and rub one out so you can clear your head? I'll wait...
The difference between me and you on this issue is that you think it's OK to have your grandmothers wedding dress smeared with the fecal filth of homosexuality, and I don't. You think it's OK for homosexual teachers to show your child how to properly fist in the fifth grade, and I don't. You are a libertine, amoral liberal/socialist, and I'm not.
Again with the anal sex obsession? And you never did provide any examples of school teachers taking advantage of kids in a gay fashion or teaching gay habits. You have to go to church for that kind of abuse.
Gagh said you should fuck off. I'm just sayin'....although it looks like I hit a big ol' fucking queer nerve with all the "perverts" and "filths" you're throwing around. Must have hit you right in the closet to get that kind of reaction. You're kind of an angry "bottom" aren't you?
