Question: Now that expensive militaristic fascism is going out, will these boards still retain their vitriol?
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Friday, September 19, 2025 19:30
VIEWED: 17791
PAGE 20 of 25
Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
(Just an aside-rant: So why is it, I wonder, that people find it so easy to scrap the pork rules...and keep a few vague mentions about certain sexual acts?
Good question...show of hands...who prefers pork ribs to sodomy?
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Still waiting for a response here, Hero....
To what?
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
(Just an aside-rant: So why is it, I wonder, that people find it so easy to scrap the pork rules...and keep a few vague mentions about certain sexual acts?
Good question...show of hands...who prefers pork ribs to sodomy?
H
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHHHH!!!
Good one.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
(Just an aside-rant: So why is it, I wonder, that people find it so easy to scrap the pork rules...and keep a few vague mentions about certain sexual acts?
Good question...show of hands...who prefers pork ribs to sodomy?
H
There is a bit more to sex than "sodomy". Kissing and pretty much everything that heterosexual couples do, is what homosexual couples do.
Pork ribs vs. kissing someone you love... show of hands?
And why not scrap both rules? Was there a quota?
I'd have more of a sense of humor about this if I had ever seen someone give a serious and sensible response.
(ETA - PS: I had hoped you would also have a response to the other things we were discussing. Later?
)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:As I said, words mean things, and if you start calling same sex unions 'marriages', you might as well start calling your brother your 'sister', and calling a chair a 'table'.
Originally posted by Kwicko:
You still haven't explained HOW it "dilutes" or "cheapens" what marriage is. Hell, you haven't rationally explained what marriage really is in the first place. And hetero couples are doing a bang-up job of ruining the word and the rite already, what with the fact that a minimum of HALF of all traditional marriages in this country fail.
Quote:
"No one is denying anyone's right here [except that you are], nor is anyone keeping 2 people a part[sic] [except that you are]..."
Mike
No one's rights are being denied, no one is being kept apart. Your simplistic utterance that they are is flat out wrong.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
As I said, words mean things, and if you start calling same sex unions 'marriages', you might as well start calling your brother your 'sister', and calling a chair a 'table'.
You may as well call people who are gay homosexua-- oh, wait a second.
Dammit! Words CAN change their meaning??
I'm pretty dang sure in many cultures the word "citizen" used to mean "a man", too.
Amendment to such meanings is not as impossible as you think.
To most people marriage means committment, family, love and an adult, consentual contract.
Between who this takes place should be a great deal less important to what marriage means. Change those other things, THEN you start diluting the word.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So as long as a man marries a woman, it's a "marriage" then, right? That is your view?
So it's no problem at all for a gay man to marry, say, a Pakistani woman who needs a green card, right? Because ICE calls these marriages "frauds" and prosecutes those who participate. But if it's a "real" marriage (in that it comprises a man and a woman, and nothing else matters), how can it be a fraud?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're overlooking the fact that a marriage , between a man and a woman is what describes a unique union that sets it a part from all other unions. Opposites in gender coming together to form the basic foundation of a family. And that's what makes such unions so unique. Anecdotal incidents of elderly or couples who choose NOT to have kids, etc do not change the fact that the vast majority of man and woman who come together to share their lives with each other will have children, and that bond is found no where else in our society. Thus, the term " marriage " has a very real and unique meaning which no other unions can claim, nor should we try to force the matter.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
So as long as a man marries a woman, it's a "marriage" then, right? That is your view?
So it's no problem at all for a gay man to marry, say, a Pakistani woman who needs a green card, right? Because ICE calls these marriages "frauds" and prosecutes those who participate. But if it's a "real" marriage (in that it comprises a man and a woman, and nothing else matters), how can it be a fraud?
Easy. There's in inherent attempt at deception w/ the faux marriages, by both parties. It matters not whether either party is gay or not, if 2 people get married because they're simply trying to gain citizenship for one , then it's fraud.
But that sorta makes the point FOR civil unions. If two people, one gay, one not, want to enter into an agreement by which they are willing to commit to each other, i don't see why they couldn't at least begin a process of say, naturalization , and with out the illegal jumping through hoops of pretending they're married. A civil union could allow for them to openly declare their intentions, and they'd have all manner of rights to visit each other in hospital, in case of emergency, or any list of things they agreed upon. A civil union need not be confined to those of a romantic relationships, but could also include plutonic ones, say between very close friends, or even say elderly siblings, who live together for companionship and assistance.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
