Bonobos. Too busy eating and getting their rocks off to worry about what the other monkeys think is natural.
And what would they have said about interracial marriage?
How gay marriage, which I could give a shit about either way ftr, is still a topic in 2017 is beyond me.
1 Like
You literally keep ignoring the other side of the argument, re-stating your original (already debated) opinion, and think others need help on learning how to actually have a conversation?
Throw in some “dumbama” comment, muslim talk, natural laws (whatever those are), and a pig analogy to top off our how to not debate 101 class you’re teaching.
1 Like
I know, it’s getting tiresome restating the obvious.
Re: bonobos: k they’re monkeys, so?
Re: Interracial marriage. The black culture is too different than mine for me to have ever considered it. But I have no comments about it as long as its male/female 
It’s not except for the bubble boy who apparently spends a lot of time thinking about gay sex and if gay people should have vows.
He also doesn’t care to debate any of it but would like to bump and old thread and leave and then get pissed when people point that out.
I think we may have found our new Raj. I do like how he tries to start with the whole I’m just saying first post and then moves on to full psycho bigot with the next one.
But hey it’s cool. He isn’t going to read the super old thread or the responses to it he’s just like to use this as his blog and point out that even though no one has posted in this thread for a year (and it started three years ago) that he is not done thinking about gay sex.
1 Like
On “natural law”- males will have sex or faux sex as an expression of dominance (like in prison). Should we do that too?
I mean, if we revert to real natural law the gloves of our humanity come off. Someone has food? I’m taking it.
Women? Might makes right. I’m taking what I want there too. I mean hey, Natural Law, right?
As for reading material, how about the actual Bill of Rights?
1 Like
Hey, if it went to “dog eat dog” how do you think the movement to “embrace diversity” and being “politically correct” would fare?
God forbid it came down to that type of world, I’m prepared just in case. And I’m willing g to bet the roving bands of heterosexual warriors outlast the nons.
I’ve read the Bill of Rights many times. Is there a point in it you wish to discuss or is this just a general recommendation? I agree it’s good to know the rules of the government. And how to change them when needed.
I’d also think that if every issue went to a popular majority vote this gay “marriage” stuff would be shot down. That crowd is not the majority after all, although it does make quite a lot of noise.
If we consider parents and grandparents, how many do we think wouldn’t want the family to continue to reproduce?
I really think there must be some intentional effort to misunderstand what people post in this thread. Really, what is happening is that people are striking poses and telling everyone how smrt they are.
Homosexuals weren’t and aren’t going to reproduce in the first place, so that has no bearing on what a traditional family does.
The point with the reversion to natural law and using it as an argument is that there is no natural law. We are governed by the Constitution, therefore the point is moot, and furthermore illegal (outside of the boundaries of the Constitution). It isn’t even a slippery slope. It is a cliff.
And if you read the Bill of Rights so many times, how is it that you think our government provides rights?
They are inalienable rights endowed by God.
I mean, I’ve only glanced at it a few times, but even I picked up on that part.
Unalienable rights are mentioned(by that name) in the Declaration of Independence. They are not mentioned in the Constitution.
Yeah you would be wrong on this one as well.
You do know some people can be straight and also not really give a shit what other people do right? I mean I’m straight and pretty positive I’ve thought about gay sex way less than you have. You seem to be quite caught up in it in fact. You’re so busy thinking about it you’d like to have a parade with other straight guys to say you’re straight. Honestly that sounds pretty gay.
When you become a Supreme Court justice maybe you can strike the opinion down?
Nah gay marriage isn’t going anywhere and in ten years some of you will still be going “but what if everyone was gay!!!”
What if you just hook up with dudes on like weekends and holidays and sometimes during the week and say, maybe break their asses like a fresh baugette? And speaking of long blunt cylinders…
That isn’t like GAY gay, is it? Its actually pretty straight, right?
Man before I was married I wanted every guy to be gay. Can you imagine your odds when your the only straight guy in town?
This guy isn’t thinking that he wants to get tons of dudes together and march to say we are straight
That isn’t nearly as bad as having “Meat Locker” tattooed on the upper lip.
A very high correlation also exists between guys who are publicly seriously anti-gay but privately very much pro gay.
Ted Haggard, Steve Wiles, Mark Foley, Larry Craig off the top of my head. Just seems like those guys who bark the most about the gay thing are always getting caught with young boys later.
It’s only gay if you’re the receptive partner.
Spoken like somebody that took a straw poll outside the local bingo hall, lol.
I know the mainstream media’s liberal bias means they cannot be trusted, but have you, like, ever talked to someone else about this? Perhaps the reactions you’ve seen on this website are at least some evidence that maybe “the majority” doesn’t actually feel this way?
You are welcome to remain in that bubble if you so choose; but as Drew already pointed out, it’s difficult to claim that you know what “the majority” thinks when you remain in said bubble.
This website, by its nature, is relatively self-selecting to include “manly men” or something like that. This thread includes people from several different states and demographic areas posting - to my knowledge, none of them are gay. But we have a guy raised in the sticks of West Virginia, a guy who lives somewhere in the woods up in Maine, a yinzer from the Saath Hills of Picksburgh, an ex-Marine living in the good city of Baltimore, and others (sorry guys, I don’t know where everybody is from) who are pretty unanimously in this camp:
…so if you honestly think that “the majority” will vote to strike down gay marriage and send them all to conversion camp, you may be disappointed in the results.
The legality of gay marriage makes no direct impact on my life, although I do have several gay friends (my wife is an opera singer), so there’s at least a second-degree impact. Really, my stance on the issue is more “Why not?” than anything else. But I have to laugh at people who are so staunchly against gay marriage under the “erosion of traditional American values” stance. If “gay people shouldn’t exist, LGBT is a disease that should be treated” are among your traditional American values, you’re welcome to hold those values - we do live in a free country. Just know that, by and large, those values will die with your generation, and that the one coming after yours feels more like this:
2 Likes
Well, the boring people are right about one thing. I do undermine marriages. Just not for the stated reason.
“Natural law in this, I mean that we are born with reproductive organs, and their natural function is to reproduce.”
If all males follow natural laws to the point that they fulfil their urge to reproduce by finding a willing female and then making an attempt at reproduction. What would that mean for the world’s population and the world’s ecosystem, especially in today’s modern world and the other “unnatural” practices humans take practice in (Taking synthetic medications, contraception etc.)
Excessive reproduction can be just as dangerous for humanity as a lack of reproduction.