Proof Gay Marriage is Wrong

Off Topic
1089

[quote]terribleivan wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:

Boo hoo! Stick to the topic. At least my original post had info pertaining to the debate at hand, info that you cut out just so you could whine like a prison bitch. Stop whining! Say something funny or useful. At least you know what your prison bitch name is now. I didn’t choose it!

I havent’ whined about squat.

You on the other hand have been dodging facts and ignoring realities.

Just like a typical hard-core left wing liberal, you have done everything you can to change a logical debate into an emotional argument.

Call me names all you want. The facts still haven’t changed. Gay marriage is bad for this country, and there are 40 pages of threads that prove it.[/quote]

You still saying nothing? Cool. Just checking. Carry on.

1090

[quote]Jimmy Tango wrote:

There goes your “homosexuality is a behaviour because it can be changed, so it doesn’t get special protection from discrimination like race or sex do” argument, ZEB–unless you can find another, more reliable source.[/quote]

That information was obtained from a gay group which was seeking to undermine Dr. Spitzer. They are not much different than you and a few others on this site. Facts are only good with your group if they agree with the gay lifestyle. Also groups which are rampant with political correctness will never see the light. Anything that Dr. Spitzer has done to rahabilitate those with same sex urges would naturally be attacked Did anyone think otherwise?

The problem that you have is that you have to knock on the doors of the 66% of men who are now happily involved with someone of the opposite sex and convince them they still want to play homosexual. LOL

Um…I’m betting you can’t do it!

They have changed and for the better. They are now happier, healthier and feel more in control of their lives. The escaped!

Sorry :frowning:

lol

Moving on:

You claim to be intelligent yet for some reason you don’t know what a behavior is?

Let’s define it for you since you are having a difficult time with it:

Behavior: “One’s actions in general or on a particular occasion.”

(Using voice I do to correct my children)

You see Jimmy that means behavior is all about “actions.” You can choose to do the right thing or the wrong thing. It’s up to you because behavior is all about taking action!

Genetics on the other hand is all about certain things you were born with. For example a black person is born with darker skin. A woman is born a different gender than a man.

You Jimmy many people who term themselves gay want so badly for society to accept thier ACTIONS as normal that they simply deny the facts.

Sad I know…

But the important message here Jimmy is that someone who develops same sex attraction is not born that way. And there has been no proof to establish that they were!

However, there is plenty of proof that people can change and have changed:

http://www.narth.com/docs/evidencefound.html

Oh I know that all the gay organizations will deny Dr. Spitzers findings. But you see Jimmy (pats Jimmy on the head) they have a big problem on their hands because they have a large majority of former “gays” who are now very happily involved with people of the opposite sex.

And no amount of name calling on their part can change that :slight_smile:

Back to behavior now Jimmy. Here take a seat over there (pulls up stool for the youngster)

Now when you do a bad or unhealthy thing you suffer the consequences of that action. For example, never ever let anyone place their penis inside your rectum Jimmy. And do you know why? Becuase the rectum was not meant for such an action. You see Jimmy all sorts of negative consequences happen when someone does that.

the lining of the bowel is not meant for that sort of thing and…well instead of me explaining it to you, your old enough to read all about what some people find to be enjoyable.

You can read all about the medical consequences of what homosexuals do right here Jimmy :

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet3.html

And Jimmy, here is another good web site for you. This one also talks about all of the nasty consequences that can take place when we use our bodies for something that they were just not constucted for.

http://www.corporateresourcecouncil.org/white_papers/Health_Risks.pdf

And don’t forget Jimmy the gay lifestyle is anything but a happy one:

Reduced life expectancy. People who participate in same sex activities tend to live 15 to 20 years less than heterosexuals.

The amount of AIDS and STD’s is far higher among those who participate in same sex activity than it is for heterosexuals.

Both depression and anxiety are much more prevalent among those who participate in same sex activity.

And naturally Jimmy the consequence of all of this pain is a higher suicide rate. it seems many of those who prefer homosexual sex over heterosexual sex find the that jumping off a very tall building or drinking a bottle of drano to be preferable to what they have been doing…I know it’s not pretty Jimmy…but sometimes the truth isn’t very nice.

So remember Jimmy while all people are deserving of our love and understanding we just are not going to change the institution of marriage for such a small very confused and tormented group of people.

If you have any questions please feel free to ask them.

otherwise have a nice day

:slight_smile:

1091

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:
It’s funny how people ignore everything I say except for the name calling–just compare their cut and paste jobs with my actual posts and any person can see just how much of my opinion they like to censor.

Oh well, it’s not like I really care; if people are busy saying how much of a coward, etc. I am, I guess that leaves them with less time to refute what I’ve presented.

Ergo, I keep owning the real argument, I guess.

The only thing you “own” is the wrong side of a losing argument!

You have been owned over and over again.

Facts, figures, polls, statistics, religion, tradition, social mores, moral high ground.

You have literally lost on every piece of arguable turf that there is.

To claim victory is almost as funny as your posts which try to claim that lesbian relationships are healthy.

LMAO
[/quote]

I already owned you. Next!

1092

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:

There goes your “homosexuality is a behaviour because it can be changed, so it doesn’t get special protection from discrimination like race or sex do” argument, ZEB–unless you can find another, more reliable source.

That information was obtained from a gay group which was seeking to undermine Dr. Spitzer. They are not much different than you and a few others on this site. Facts are only good with your group if they agree with the gay lifestyle. Also groups which are rampant with political correctness will never see the light. Anything that Dr. Spitzer has done to rahabilitate those with same sex urges would naturally be attacked Did anyone think otherwise?

The problem that you have is that you have to knock on the doors of the 66% of men who are now happily involved with someone of the opposite sex and convince them they still want to play homosexual. LOL

Um…I’m betting you can’t do it!

They have changed and for the better. They are now happier, healthier and feel more in control of their lives. The escaped!

Sorry :frowning:

lol

Moving on:

You claim to be intelligent yet for some reason you don’t know what a behavior is?

Let’s define it for you since you are having a difficult time with it:

Behavior: “One’s actions in general or on a particular occasion.”

(Using voice I do to correct my children)

You see Jimmy that means behavior is all about “actions.” You can choose to do the right thing or the wrong thing. It’s up to you because behavior is all about taking action!

Genetics on the other hand is all about certain things you were born with. For example a black person is born with darker skin. A woman is born a different gender than a man.

You Jimmy many people who term themselves gay want so badly for society to accept thier ACTIONS as normal that they simply deny the facts.

Sad I know…

But the important message here Jimmy is that someone who develops same sex attraction is not born that way. And there has been no proof to establish that they were!

However, there is plenty of proof that people can change and have changed:

http://www.narth.com/docs/evidencefound.html

Oh I know that all the gay organizations will deny Dr. Spitzers findings. But you see Jimmy (pats Jimmy on the head) they have a big problem on their hands because they have a large majority of former “gays” who are now very happily involved with people of the opposite sex.

And no amount of name calling on their part can change that :slight_smile:

Back to behavior now Jimmy. Here take a seat over there (pulls up stool for the youngster)

Now when you do a bad or unhealthy thing you suffer the consequences of that action. For example, never ever let anyone place their penis inside your rectum Jimmy. And do you know why? Becuase the rectum was not meant for such an action. You see Jimmy all sorts of negative consequences happen when someone does that.

the lining of the bowel is not meant for that sort of thing and…well instead of me explaining it to you, your old enough to read all about what some people find to be enjoyable.

You can read all about the medical consequences of what homosexuals do right here Jimmy :

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet3.html

And Jimmy, here is another good web site for you. This one also talks about all of the nasty consequences that can take place when we use our bodies for something that they were just not constucted for.

http://www.corporateresourcecouncil.org/white_papers/Health_Risks.pdf

And don’t forget Jimmy the gay lifestyle is anything but a happy one:

Reduced life expectancy. People who participate in same sex activities tend to live 15 to 20 years less than heterosexuals.

The amount of AIDS and STD’s is far higher among those who participate in same sex activity than it is for heterosexuals.

Both depression and anxiety are much more prevalent among those who participate in same sex activity.

And naturally Jimmy the consequence of all of this pain is a higher suicide rate. it seems many of those who prefer homosexual sex over heterosexual sex find the that jumping off a very tall building or drinking a bottle of drano to be preferable to what they have been doing…I know it’s not pretty Jimmy…but sometimes the truth isn’t very nice.

So remember Jimmy while all people are deserving of our love and understanding we just are not going to change the institution of marriage for such a small very confused and tormented group of people.

If you have any questions please feel free to ask them.

otherwise have a nice day

:slight_smile:

[/quote]

Oops! Already pwned.

1093

[quote]terribleivan wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:

Yeah, name-calling sure is a good proof of my weakness.

You missed the point entirely. Your name calling shows the WEAKNESS OF YOUR POSITION.

Man, it’s like explaining things to a two year old. Let me repeat so I don’t have to do it again.

YOUR POSITION IS WEAK.

Here, I will say it another way to help you understand.

THE FACTS SHOW THAT YOUR POSITION IS WEAK.

Please, tango, you may continue with the name calling now.[/quote]

How eloquent! Too bad you already got owned, by moi, personally.

1094

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:
The fact that a lifestyle is destructive has no bearing on whether someone is allowed to get married or not.

We do not prevent convicted felons from getting married–John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, and “Night Stalker” Richard Ramirez being a few ‘notable’ cases. We do not prevent drug addicts from getting married. We do not prevent those with terminal diseases from getting married. We do not prevent any demographic which exhibits any sign of increased mortality from getting married based on that alone.

Destructive lifestyles don’t count against homosexuals in terms of barring marriage rights and priviledges.

The above was reposted for ZEB and Lorisco’s benefit because it has yet to be addressed by any of them.

Please explain how my logic does not make sense here.

If the only reason is tradition, then please see my other posts about the validity of tradition alone. Like, uh, the last one I just posted on what Martin Luther wrote about in the 16th century.

Changing a 5000+ year old institution for about 1% of a population that has shown themselves to be unworthy in every way of the privilidge of marriage. Not just because of the disease that is spread by same sex sex. But because of the the overwhelming statistics which demonstrate that same sex relationships do not last. And in fact provisions for cheating are built into the majority of them.

And on top of that it has also been demonstrated that same sex relationships be them two men or two women are fraught with both verbal and physical abuse!

These folks need help not enablers![/quote]

I will consider this your admitting to being owned in the category of “Relevance of Destructive Behaviour In Determining Right to Get Married”.

Case closed.

1095

[quote]Jimmy Tango wrote:

I can’t even figure out where you got 90% for something called “verbal aggression” which you state as being worse than abuse. [/quote]

(continues to talk to Jimmy like a young child)

You see Jimmy a long long time ago before there was anything called an Interet there things called “books.”

Books are wonderful things Jimmy and I am going to post the statistics for about the 6th time because I know you are young and have a hard time keeping up. Hey we were all young Jimmy don’t feel at all bad about it.

Now Jimmy do you see the very first sentence in the following:

“A study in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence examined conflict and violence in lesbian relationships.”

(The above sentence means that the following information came right from that very source :slight_smile:

“The researchers found that 90 percent of the lesbians surveyed had been recipients of one or more acts of verbal aggression from their intimate partners during the year prior to this study, with 31 percent reporting one or more incidents of physical abuse.[69]”

Now if you want to check that out Jimmy I suggest that you do so. Every statistic that I have posted are from credible sources.

Now run along you have plenty of work to do…

(The little tyke goes skipping off to check all of those nasty resources which demonstrated that homosexual behavior is not physically or mentally healthy)

And another saga ends…

:slight_smile:

1096

[quote]Jimmy Tango wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:
It’s funny how people ignore everything I say except for the name calling–just compare their cut and paste jobs with my actual posts and any person can see just how much of my opinion they like to censor.

Oh well, it’s not like I really care; if people are busy saying how much of a coward, etc. I am, I guess that leaves them with less time to refute what I’ve presented.

Ergo, I keep owning the real argument, I guess.

The only thing you “own” is the wrong side of a losing argument!

You have been owned over and over again.

Facts, figures, polls, statistics, religion, tradition, social mores, moral high ground.

You have literally lost on every piece of arguable turf that there is.

To claim victory is almost as funny as your posts which try to claim that lesbian relationships are healthy.

LMAO

I already owned you. Next![/quote]

More avoidance. Typical when you can’t win your argument.

1097

[quote]terribleivan wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:

Yes, MORE LIBERAL LOGIC! Logic is good. Why is my logic liberal? I didn’t know that logic came in denominations

So much to teach you tango, and so little time.

Liberal logic is a sarcastic term that describes people who deviate from logic and press emotions. It really is not logic at all. It involves the distortion of facts to fit one’s own viewpoint.

Sound alot like you, eh tango?[/quote]

Hey, RETARDO… you cut out the part where I said that you were being sarcastic. Stop being a retard and editing my posts to make you sound good. Remember the part where I said, “More liberal fallacy!” Then, remember the part in the brackets? Get it, RETARD?

If anyone wants a look at a sheer retard, terribleivan’s the MAN!

LOL. Seriously, you must be joking man. It must be some attempt to keep me busy and entertained at the complete lack of reading comprehension, because any of the other alternatives are too unbelievable to imagine. You couldn’t read the next sentence after what you posted?

C’mon… No one is THAT dumb. You must be pulling my chain. You’ve done it way too many times, trying to get me all riled up. Well, it’s just hilarious… I don’t know how it was supposed to make me look bad, if that’s what you were trying to pull, but it’s funny.

If only I knew if you were really joking with me or if you were posting seriously. No matter what you say, I just can’t trust it now.

1098

[quote]Jimmy Tango wrote:
terribleivan wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:

Yeah, name-calling sure is a good proof of my weakness.

You missed the point entirely. Your name calling shows the WEAKNESS OF YOUR POSITION.

Man, it’s like explaining things to a two year old. Let me repeat so I don’t have to do it again.

YOUR POSITION IS WEAK.

Here, I will say it another way to help you understand.

THE FACTS SHOW THAT YOUR POSITION IS WEAK.

Please, tango, you may continue with the name calling now.

How eloquent! Too bad you already got owned, by moi, personally.

[/quote]

Again, claiming victory without facts. Typical.

1099

[quote]Jimmy Tango wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:
The fact that a lifestyle is destructive has no bearing on whether someone is allowed to get married or not.

We do not prevent convicted felons from getting married–John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, and “Night Stalker” Richard Ramirez being a few ‘notable’ cases. We do not prevent drug addicts from getting married. We do not prevent those with terminal diseases from getting married. We do not prevent any demographic which exhibits any sign of increased mortality from getting married based on that alone.

Destructive lifestyles don’t count against homosexuals in terms of barring marriage rights and priviledges.

The above was reposted for ZEB and Lorisco’s benefit because it has yet to be addressed by any of them.

Please explain how my logic does not make sense here.

If the only reason is tradition, then please see my other posts about the validity of tradition alone. Like, uh, the last one I just posted on what Martin Luther wrote about in the 16th century.

Changing a 5000+ year old institution for about 1% of a population that has shown themselves to be unworthy in every way of the privilidge of marriage. Not just because of the disease that is spread by same sex sex. But because of the the overwhelming statistics which demonstrate that same sex relationships do not last. And in fact provisions for cheating are built into the majority of them.

And on top of that it has also been demonstrated that same sex relationships be them two men or two women are fraught with both verbal and physical abuse!

These folks need help not enablers!

I will consider this your admitting to being owned in the category of “Relevance of Destructive Behaviour In Determining Right to Get Married”.

Case closed.
[/quote]

Premature victory, yet again. Do you see a pattern yet?

1100

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:

I can’t even figure out where you got 90% for something called “verbal aggression” which you state as being worse than abuse.

(continues to talk to Jimmy like a young child)

You see Jimmy a long long time ago before there was anything called an Interet there things called “books.”

Books are wonderful things Jimmy and I am going to post the statistics for about the 6th time because I know you are young and have a hard time keeping up. Hey we were all young Jimmy don’t feel at all bad about it.

Now Jimmy do you see the very first sentence in the following:

“A study in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence examined conflict and violence in lesbian relationships.”

(The above sentence means that the following information came right from that very source :slight_smile:

“The researchers found that 90 percent of the lesbians surveyed had been recipients of one or more acts of verbal aggression from their intimate partners during the year prior to this study, with 31 percent reporting one or more incidents of physical abuse.[69]”

Now if you want to check that out Jimmy I suggest that you do so. Every statistic that I have posted are from credible sources.

Now run along you have plenty of work to do…

(The little tyke goes skipping off to check all of those nasty resources which demonstrated that homosexual behavior is not physically or mentally healthy)

And another saga ends…

:slight_smile:
[/quote]

… as soon as ZEB can understand how to cite a source properly.

1101

[quote]Jimmy Tango wrote:
…

How eloquent! Too bad you already got owned, by moi, personally.

[/quote]

Give me a break. You keep saying this but Zeb is keeping up or even leading this internet debate.

Good points are brought up by both sides.

No one is getting owned, but you haven’t brought much to the table from the pro gay marriage side that hasn’t already been said more eloquently by others.

Lets go for another 1000 posts!

1102

[quote]Jimmy Tango wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:
The fact that a lifestyle is destructive has no bearing on whether someone is allowed to get married or not.

We do not prevent convicted felons from getting married–John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, and “Night Stalker” Richard Ramirez being a few ‘notable’ cases. We do not prevent drug addicts from getting married. We do not prevent those with terminal diseases from getting married. We do not prevent any demographic which exhibits any sign of increased mortality from getting married based on that alone.

Destructive lifestyles don’t count against homosexuals in terms of barring marriage rights and priviledges.

The above was reposted for ZEB and Lorisco’s benefit because it has yet to be addressed by any of them.

Please explain how my logic does not make sense here.

If the only reason is tradition, then please see my other posts about the validity of tradition alone. Like, uh, the last one I just posted on what Martin Luther wrote about in the 16th century.

Changing a 5000+ year old institution for about 1% of a population that has shown themselves to be unworthy in every way of the privilidge of marriage. Not just because of the disease that is spread by same sex sex. But because of the the overwhelming statistics which demonstrate that same sex relationships do not last. And in fact provisions for cheating are built into the majority of them.

And on top of that it has also been demonstrated that same sex relationships be them two men or two women are fraught with both verbal and physical abuse!

These folks need help not enablers!

I will consider this your admitting to being owned in the category of “Relevance of Destructive Behaviour In Determining Right to Get Married”.

Case closed.
[/quote]

You have sort of an “owned” fixation huh?

I have given stats which demonstrate that gays have:

Higher suicide rate

Higher depression and anxiety rate.

Higher rate of AIDS and STD’s.

Higher rate of domestic problems.

You have done nothing but post that you “own” everyone.

I have also demonstrated beyond any doubt that the Bible is against homosexual behavior (when the topic of the Bible came up).

Your side have given not one valid reason for gay marriage to date.

Quite honestly the debate is over. It’s just a matter of rehashing what was already stated (which has been going on for a few pages now). And I’m willing to do that so that more people are able to read the truth, unlike what they get from the media.

There, I have just “owned” you for maybe the 23rd time. :slight_smile:

Hey I like playing the “owned” game…lol

1103

[quote]Jimmy Tango wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:

I can’t even figure out where you got 90% for something called “verbal aggression” which you state as being worse than abuse.

(continues to talk to Jimmy like a young child)

You see Jimmy a long long time ago before there was anything called an Interet there things called “books.”

Books are wonderful things Jimmy and I am going to post the statistics for about the 6th time because I know you are young and have a hard time keeping up. Hey we were all young Jimmy don’t feel at all bad about it.

Now Jimmy do you see the very first sentence in the following:

“A study in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence examined conflict and violence in lesbian relationships.”

(The above sentence means that the following information came right from that very source :slight_smile:

“The researchers found that 90 percent of the lesbians surveyed had been recipients of one or more acts of verbal aggression from their intimate partners during the year prior to this study, with 31 percent reporting one or more incidents of physical abuse.[69]”

Now if you want to check that out Jimmy I suggest that you do so. Every statistic that I have posted are from credible sources.

Now run along you have plenty of work to do…

(The little tyke goes skipping off to check all of those nasty resources which demonstrated that homosexual behavior is not physically or mentally healthy)

And another saga ends…

:slight_smile:

… as soon as ZEB can understand how to cite a source properly.[/quote]

Look it up duh! gave you the name of the resource…

I get it now (hits head with palm) we are just doing the one line denial stuff!

What’s wrong are you tired?

Up all night doing nasty things?

LOL

There I “owned” you again…:slight_smile:

1104

[quote]ZEB wrote:

I get it now (hits head with palm) we are just doing the one line denial stuff!

What’s wrong are you tired?

Up all night doing nasty things?

LOL

There I “owned” you again…:slight_smile:

[/quote]

LOL - I almost laughed myself into a coma!

1105

[quote]Jimmy Tango wrote:
Yeah, name-calling sure is a good proof of my weakness. Well, now that we’re through with that, I have to point out that you did some really good work here today, Lorisco:

“The point still is that changing a law for only 2.1% of the population is special interest.”

You’re 100% right! It’s in the special interest of equality for all! Very good! I finally got through to you. And here I was, calling you names. Gee whiz, I guess that makes me a dummy! Wah! Just joking–I’m okay!

But do you know why that change ensures equality? That’s right, Lorisco–because then all monogamous unions would be regarded equally under the eyes of the law!

You are so smart! Keep up the good work, champ. [/quote]

Great! Then I guess we need to legalize drug use as well. Remember, “equality for all”. It can’t be just those people who have prescriptions who can use the good drugs. That would not be equal rights.

So let’s drop all the moral related laws, which would be 95% of all laws, and let everyone do whatever they want. Remember sport, equality for all!

1106

[quote]Jimmy Tango wrote:

Lorisco wrote:

According to the US census website: Gay Population (un-married Partners) = 2.1% (2004) or 6,255,565 Gays

Um, if 2.1% of a population is 6,255,565, then the total population is slightly less than 300 million. (297,884,048 to be as exact as far as whole numbers allow.)

Something’s either wrong with your math again or maybe your definition of “Gays” is out this time.

Try again?[/quote]

That is the US Census definition of gays (un-married partners). Don’t like it, go argue with them.

1107

[quote]Jimmy Tango wrote:
The fact that a lifestyle is destructive has no bearing on whether someone is allowed to get married or not.
[/quote]

True. Then we should just uphold the current laws banning same sex sexual acts. So gays can marry they just can’t engage in any homosexual sex acts, because to do so would be against the law.

You have just solved the debate for us. Married yes, gay sex no. This way they can have equal rights and still not break the law. Gee Tango, you are sooo smart.

1108

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Jimmy Tango wrote:
…

How eloquent! Too bad you already got owned, by moi, personally.

Give me a break. You keep saying this but Zeb is keeping up or even leading this internet debate.

Good points are brought up by both sides.

No one is getting owned, but you haven’t brought much to the table from the pro gay marriage side that hasn’t already been said more eloquently by others.

Lets go for another 1000 posts![/quote]

Did you not read WMD’s report on the peer review of ZEB’s Spitzer study? That pretty much destroys the validity of Spitzer’s study. And if you understand that ZEB is constantly harping about how homosexuality is a behaviour (reversion therapy being a key piece of supporting evidence in his belief) then you’d be able to conclude that his position is significantly weakened unless he can come up with other sources. I call it getting owned. Whatever.

The eloquence failed, so I’m switching tactics for awhile and trying to have fun. And I can’t believe some of the things said. I can run a few quotes if you want.

I don’t think you’ve read all of my posts in this forum–you’d see more eloquence earlier, before I kept coming up against broken records, no matter how many time I changed my angle of attack. Whatever.

Anyways, ZEB keeping up or leading the debate? Care to explain how you judged that? Is that in sheer stubborness or number of posts? Which points are the good points on both sides? I’m curious.

Since you seem to be an impartial judge, I’d like to know. Seriously… if you are.